Skip to main content

Full text of "Community Media Review, Vol. 07, No. 2-3, Summer-Fall 1984"

See other formats


Community 
Television Review 



VOLUME 7, No. 2 & 3 
Summer/Fall 1984 
$5.00 

Special Double Issue 





AROUND 
THE WORLD 






NILGP CONVENTION 





A Time, Inc. Company 



Community Television Review 3 



Double Issue 

Volume 7, No. 2 and 3 



The Community Television Review is published 
quarterly by the National Federation of Local Cable 
Programmers. Send subscriptions, memberships, 
and inquiries to NFLCP, 906 Pennsylvania Ave., 
S.E., 2 (XX) 3. Subscriptions come with membership 
in the NFLCP: Community Associate/Student 
535/year, Professional $50/year, Patron SlOO/year, 
Non-profit organizations $90/year, For-profit 
organizations $150/year. A subscription can be ob- 
tained separately for $12/year for individuals, 
$20/year for libraries, or $30/year for organizations. 
Contents Copyright © 1984 by the National Federa- 
tion of Local Cable Programmers, Inc.— Non-profit 
tax exempt organizations may reprint items from the 
CTR (with the exception of materials copyrighted 
by others), provided they credit CTR and notify the 
NFLCP of the reprinting. All others must obtain 
advance written permission. 



Editorial Board: 

Susan Bednarcyzk, Trisha Dair, Jean 
Rice, Bill Rushton, George Stoney, 
Karen Kalergis 

Managing Editor: 

Paul D'Ari 

Cover Art & Design: 

Evans Graphics 

Advertising: 

Chuck Sherwood (212) 873-4958 
or 

Paul DAri (202) 544-7272 



NFLCP BOARD OF DIRECTORS 

Margie Nicholson, Chairperson; Jan Lesher, Vice- 
Chair; William J. Tierney, Treasurer; Sally Roethle, 
Secretary; George Stoney; Dirk Koning; Rika Welsh; 
Trisha Dair, Frank Jamison, Speranza Avram; Fred 
Johnson; Lamonte Ward; Karen Kalergis; Martha 
Schmidt, Greg Epler Wood; Alan Bushong; Jay 
Smith; Joe Van Eaton. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Access Around the World 


Public Access: A World View 


5 


Developing New Directions for Community Communications in Canada 


8 


Public Access in Great Britain 


10 


Community Programming in the Netherlands 


12 


France Enters the Cable Age 


14 


Community Video in Israel — A View From Kibbutzim 


16 


Cable Comes to West Germany 


20 


International Telecommunications and Information Policy 


25 


Convention News 


Optimism Reigns at NFLCP Convention in Denver 


26 


Cable Access as a Community Asset 


30 


Making Telecommunications Ready for Democracy 


32 


NFLCP Awards Night 


33 


The Convention Exhibitors 


35 


General 


How Local Programming Made the Cut at NCTA's 1984 Convention 


36 


The Community Videot: A Resource of Technical Tips 


38 


Public Policy 


Whose First Amendment is It, Anyway? 


39 


Rethinking Public Access 


40 



4 Community Television Review 



Letter from the Managing Editor 

This is a special double issue of CTR that follows two themes: NFLCP's 1984 Convention 
and community programming around the world. In many ways it is appropriate that these 
two topics are being examined together. The NFLCP National Convention moves us to reflect 
upon the vast movement in community communications that extends throughout the United 
States. In considering this we realize we are not alone in our dedication to community pro- 
gramming and public access to mass communications. And when we examine global efforts 
to democratize mass communications and sustain local programming, we see that our strug- 
gle is a universal one. Battles are being waged to open up mass communications in dozens 
of countries in nearly every continent in the world. This inspiring notion is worth reflecting 
upon as we go about promoting local programming and public access in our own com- 
munities, I hope you enjoy this issue. 

The CTR Editorial Board has selected themes for the next five issues. They are the following: 



Local Origination 

Social Service Agencies & Cable 

Cable & the First Amendment/Media 

Concentration 
Municipal Use of Cable /Interconnection 
Schools & Cable 



Copy Deadline 

November 1 
February 1 

May I 
August 1 
November 1 



Publication Date 

December 15 
March 15 

June 15 
September 15 
December 15 



If you have any ideas or wish to write for CTR, contact me as soon as possible. 

I would also like to take this opportunity to announce that a new section on municipal 
use of cable will appear in future issues of CTR. Andy Becher from Beaverton, Oregon will 
be coordinating this effort, and if you are interested in submitting any material contact him: 
Andy Beecher, Metropolitan Area Communications Commission, 12655 SW Center Street, 
Suite 390, Beaverton, Oregon 97005, (503) 641-0218. He wants to hear from people about 
successful prograrnming formats, government access rules and procedures, methods of pro- 
gram evaluation, advisory committees, management topics and any other matters that con- 
cern municipal programmers. 

Paul DAri 



Letter to the Editor: 

Hire A Broadcaster!? 



In the Spring 1984 edition of CTR (Vol- 
ume 7, No. 1), there appeared a round- 
table discussion titled: "Hiring for Access: 
Choosing the Right Person for the Job." 
Upon reading the article, some thoughts 
occurred to me which I would like to share 
with the readers of CTR. 

The discussants were in my opinion, re- 
peating cliches about cable television, 
some of which were about as accurate as 
the timeworn canards about a certain race 
of people having rhythm, and a certain 
ethnic group loving money. One thought 
of mine, itself unfortunately a cliche, was 
that a dead horse was being beaten. Trade 
unionists refer to this type of cliche as 
"educating the already educated." Here's 
the prime cliche example in the article, 
again in my opinion: 



"Question: What about a broadcaster's 
experience as potentially relevant to ac- 
cess?" (note the loaded word 'poten- 
tially'!) 

The round table respondents carefully 
explained that cable is narrowcasting; that 
broadcasters are unable to operate on lim- 
ited resources; that format (form) and 
style are stressed above content and pro- 
cess by broadcasters; and that broadcast 
people are primarily concerned with the 
ego trip of personal name recognition 
rather than the gratification of seeing the 
success of the access producer's product. 

Wow! I could provide anecdotes enough 
to fill a book to refute those charges (and 
I will, someday) but for now, suffice it to 
say that any reader of CTR is eminently 
aware of the 'focus' of cable, narrow 



rather than broad; that most older broad- 
cast people that I know who grew up in 
small town radio, before the magic tube, 
operated on pennies (I remember spot an- 
nouncements that sold at 60 cents each), 
and they had lots of fun doing things that 
even access folks are constrained to avoid 
(i.e., deliberately breaking up a live an- 
nouncer on the air). 

The worse indictment of the lot, how- 
ever, that form is valued above content, is 
simply not true. What is true is that most 
commercial television, and radio too, 
does have terrible content quality. But 
that is a different story, and has to do 
with the thousands of hours of the stuff 
that fill the airwaves, and the idea burn- 
out that has occurred over the years to the 
professionals in the business. What is also 
true, is that CTR readers have grown up 
watching television, noting the deteriora- 
tion of content, but I believe, totally 
unaware that they were at the same time 
watching a superbly skillfully produced 
medium which was giving them a sublimi- 
nal "programming" value system second 
to none. Your program sense has been 
molded by rarely ever watching a technical 
error, even on live TV, and that indeed is 
'process.' Buy why decry form? It is an- 
other way of describing beauty. Botticelli 
created form. The U.S. Capitol is wonder- 
ful form, and the process which goes on 
within the capitol is often of admirable 
content. 

Finally, as to ego, can it really be, hon- 
estly be limited to broadcast television 
people? What about the ego that permits 
the round table respondents to be quoted 
in CTR, and for that matter what about 
mine which evoked this response to the ar- 
ticle. Again we look to 'focus.' The access 
director must use his ego (all communica- 
tors are egotists) as a role model for the 
access producers in his/her community. 

My thesis then is that broadcasters, 
even shopworn ones like myself, have a 
wealth to offer to access. Simply take the 
skills, the expertise and the programming 
judgements that you deem valuable, and 
discard the values that contradict your 
views of access. Do indeed hire the person 
who is handicapped by exposure to that 
slick broadcast television medium. 

Bob Oringel 

Bowie Access Corporation 
Bowie, MD 



Community Television Review 5 



Public Access: A World View 

By George C. Stoney 



The reality of public access to cable tele- 
vision is almost unknown outside of 
North America. But the concepts that 
have shaped this movement and the 
underlying needs that have impelled it are 
worldwide. 

In many countries strategies are being 
tested to give people other than profes- 
sional journalists and their employers the 
right to use electronic highways as they 
wish. The best known of these are to be 
found in Western Europe and consist of 
small blocks of time set aside in the 
regular broadcast day for people to speak 
their minds. 

Since 1970 the BBC's "Open Door" 
program has assigned an hour on Sunday 
evenings to selected lay bodies and a few 
private citizens. The BBC supplies guid- 
ance and production funds as well. West 
Germany, Belgium, France and Switzer- 
land have seen similar experiments in 
access-type television. All these efforts 
seem so timid, so dominated by the pro- 
fessional staffs which supervise them that 
anyone familiar with the freewheeling 
atmosphere of most access centers in 
the U.S. would hardly recognize them as 
kin. Yet there is more than a family 
resemblance, 

I first came upon the access concept 
outside of North America at a gathering 
of the International Broadcasting Insti- 
tute in Mexico City back in 1974. The par- 
ticipants in the session devoted to the ac- 
cess concept came from most parts of the 
globe and from countries where broad- 
casting is owned and controlled in many 
different ways. Yet in every country the 
same needs were being expressed for some 
way to give non-professionals a semblance 
of the access to broadcast media that they 
have to print almost as a matter of course. 

In these discussions it was taken as a 
given that broadcasting is a virtuai mo- 
nopoly, usually government dominated. It 
was lamented that with the increasing 
dependence world-wide on the electronic 
media for public information, only a tiny 
body of professionals, working often in 
commercially or governmental imposed 
straight jackets themselves, were creating 
the content. 



It struck me forcefully at that time how 
much easier it seems to be for central 
forces to control communications now 
than at any time since the invention of the 
printing press. As I listened to the debates 
I realized it makes little difference if the 
controls rest in government or commercial 
hands. Essentially it is always a battle be- 
tween the "ins and the outs/' 



Piracy in Spain 

Since the early 1970s the most notable 
practical demonstrations of the public ac- 
cess concept outside North America have 
been made in defiance of national autho- 
rities. Illegal radio and television stations 
are now so common in Italy that they pro- 
vide a significant amount of information 
to the public. Last summer I visited an il- 
legal television station in a small Catalon- 
speaking town north of Barcelona that 
had been shut down repeatedly, only to 
open again for its every Monday evening 
broadcasts when representatives of the 
national authority retired. 

I was fascinated to see how activities 
around this Spanish station's spare base- 
ment studio resembled what I had seen in 
a small cable access studio in East Tennes- 
see in 1972. The programs, all made by 
volunteers from the community, were also 
similar:— local sports, performances by 
local musical groups, demonstrations by 
craftsmen, interviews with senior citizens, 
even a comedy team. 

I marvled that a government would risk 
offending its citizens by censoring such 
seemingly innocuous fare. I also marvled 
that two hundred local families would 
both contribute the equivalent of several 
hundred dollars each to buy the used 
equipment needed for the operation that 
had been smuggled from Italy, and risk 
arrest by being identified with the broad- 
casts. 

The answer given me by the coordinator 
w r as as complex as his own motivations for 
daring to be involved in the station's most 
conspicuous position. He made his living 



as the local television repairman, and 
resented being restricted to these menial 
tasks that supported his family, but which 
did not use the superior knowledge he had 
about broadcasting. He, as a Catalon, 
resented the domination of any national 
authority that was only reluctantly recog- 
nizing his right to use his own language, 
and would not countenance the possibility 
that he might also have some claim on a 
separate political existence. He saw in the 
activities of the station an opportunity to 
rally the kind of cooperative spirit that his 
town had not known since the days before 
Franco put an end to Spain's first republic. 

A professor of communications at the 
University of Barcelona who had intro- 
duced me to this station explained that it 
was the potential of the station as a model 
of defiance that was most disburbing to 
central authorities. His solution was a 
characteristicly academic one: he would 
try to persuade the government to permit 
the station a temporary license to carry 
out, under the supervision of his academic 
division, a series of experiments in com- 
munity programming that could serve as 
models for the kind of service the Spanish 
Broadcasting Authority would be propos- 
ing for its own Catalon language service, 
soon to be inaugurated. After all, he said, 
it wouldn't make that much difference in 
the content of the programs and the tech- 
nical quality would be improved. 

"What would happen, then, to the local 
coordinator and his supporters?" I asked. 

"Oh, they will continue to be useful," 
he responded. I nodded and kept my 
counsel, deciding not to get involved in a 
long discussion about the difference be- 
tween true public access and management- 
dominated local origination, though the 
outlines of the argument seemed distress- 
ingly familiary. 

Indeed, as I recall from those discus- 
sions at the LB. A. in Mexico City in 1974 
and, since, in my travels to see how other 
countries have dealt with what I have 
come to think of as "the impulse toward 
public access," the potential threat to 
authority is almost always at the root of 
the matter. 



6 Community Television Review 




Community Radio in Nigeria 

When Nigeria gained its independence 
it was left with a BBC-designed broadcast 
system controlled by the central authority. 
Four revolutions later this country, made 
up of four dominent tribes and many 
other autonomous ethnic groups (it is a 
nation today primarily because it was so 
packaged for Colonial convenience), faced 
the fact that a nationally controlled 
broadcasting system was not achieving na- 
tional unity. A wise Minister of Informa- 
tion decided 4 4 to make radio an extension 
of the village drum." 

For a while community radio in Nigeria 
blossomed with local singers, local drama* 
local religious and political happenings. 
Educators and health workers broke away 
from the BBC-style formal presentations 
to include non-certified purveyors of folk 
wisdom. Soon ordinary people who had 
gained skill in the use of radio were be- 
coming politically important. And soon 
there were rumblings in government cir- 
cles that community radio was fostering 
insurrection, as indeed it might have been 
in some instances. Inevitably the crack- 
down came, but not soon enough to kill 
completely an impulse toward self-expres- 
sion and cultural autonomy that still 
characterizes the best of community radio 
in Nigeria. 

There are parallels with the Nigerian 
radio story taking place today in com- 
munity radio efforts being sponsored by 
the Maryknoll Fathers in Guatemala and 
Peru, by Baha'is in Columbia and by non- 
governmental agencies in many other 
parts of the world. Interestingly enough, 
finding local people who are quite inno- 
cent of professional training but who are 
able and willing to make programs that 
reach out to their neighbors seems never 
to be a problem. Amost always the prob- 
lems are with those in authority and their 
professional hirelings who are convinced 
that the people can't be trusted. 

An Experiment in India 

I visited India at a time when the 
educators there had been given access to a 



satellite to experiment with the beaming 
of programs to a significant segment of its 
40,000 villages. Despite more than two 
years of preparation, scarcely enough pro- 
gramming had been stockpiled by the day 
broadcasting was to begin to last out the 
first month. In panic the professionals 
turned to village educators who, in turn, 
asked the help of local parents and farm- 
ers. The result was some fascinating pro- 
grams recorded on half inch black and 
white porta-packs and put out on the 
satellite without editing. 

How well these tapes were received in 
the villages I have no way of knowing. But 
I can report that when I was shown a sam- 
ple by one of the teachers involved and 
asked permission to copy it to take back 
to the States, he was forbidden to let me do 
so by his superior who seemed embarrass- 
ed by its lack of technical quality and con- 
formity to "educational standards," 

The Struggle for Access 

So it goes all over the world . . . the 
"ins" use technical and professional stan- 
dards as measures to keep the public at 
large from having access to the power 
bases and/ or financial bases they feel are 
rightfully theirs alone. Meanwhile, all 
over the world, ordinary people are prov- 
ing that they can speak for themselves. 

Where there has been relatively free and 
continuous access, unhampered by finan- 
cial restrictions, popular success has been 
notable, as the Canadian Broadcasting 
Commission's remarkable work with the 
native peoples of the Northern Territories 
can attest. Where any sizable segment of 
the people have experienced access, even 
the harshest opposition that follows can- 
not kill it completely. In proof, consider 
the growing phenomenon of illegal radio 
stations that are adjunct to most revolu- 
tionary movements. By now there are sim- 
ply too many people who know how to 
deal with the technical machinery of 
broadcasting to keep it forever a state 
secret. 

An interesting case in point is the 
politicizing of audio cassettes in West 
Africa. Popular singers are also political 



messengers. Used cassettes sell for eight 
cents a piece in the market towns. With a 
mini-to-mini cable almost anyone with a 
cassette player can make his own copies to 
take back to their village, and they do. 
This is pamphleteering that moves that 
vast body of illiterate people who, never- 
theless, are beginning to be politically ac- 
tive and are beyond the reach of print. 

These movements toward more popular 
participation, be they illegal radio and tv 
stations, home-made cassettes or authori- 
ty-sponsored programs like those repre- 
sented by the CBC's work with Indians, 
will not, in themselves, automatically lead 
to the development of a tradition of free- 
dom of the airways similar to the doctrine 
of press freedom we assume to be part of 
the North American and Western Euro- 
pean tradition. This tradition of press 
freedom has been so influential in other 
parts of the globe that only in the most 
completely totalitarian countries does 
there exist in the rhelm of print anything 
like the controlls assumed to be necessary 
with electronic media. 

On close scrutiny it is devastating to 
note how little true freedom of the air- 
ways exists anywhere. This is why our cur- 
rent experimental period with public ac- 
cess to cable has been, and remains, so im- 
portant. We are pioneering a concept that 
is as important to the existence of popular 
government in our day as was the concept 
of "one man one vote" a century ago. 
Short of going the "illegal" route (which 
has its own undemocratic tendencies) we 
are obligated to find for this new concept 
of access equally new governing principals. 

Censorship 

One of the fundamental obstacles to de- 
veloping these principles is the argument 
for "professionalism and objectivity' * in 
access. This is becoming a more and more 
familiar argument; one I am hearing often 
from city cable officers in the United 
States, especially those responsible for 
municipal access. Even librarians, who 
would not countenance the thought of 
censoring books or the programs offered 
in public forums they house, often take 



Community Television Review 7 




the same attitude when considering 
whether or not to have citizen-generated 
programs appear on "their" channels. 
It's the "ins against the outs" once again, 
even in our ideal world of public access 
cable. 

In the abstract almost everyone will 
agree that censorship is bad. When one 
gets down to cases, however, almost all of 
us are likely to find exceptions. Eventual- 
ly, as the concept of public access 
matures, we may have to take heed of this 
inherent contradiction. 

In the U.S. it is generally assumed that 
information not generated by private par- 
ties is suspect, and government agencies 
are often hard pressed to carry out their 
responsibilities to educate the public with- 
out heavy criticism. Yet anyone who has 
worked in a government program that re- 
quired public understanding is aware of 
the difficulty this imposes on all concern- 
ed. Perhaps with cable-access we can turn 
the government-assigned channels into a 



device for experimenting with another ap- 
proach. Why not make these channels a 
place where the government and the peo- 
ple exchange information? Must elec- 
tronic media always present confrontation 
and conflict? 

Recently I was talking with a young 
press and tv representative covering the 
Central American scene as a stringer for 
U.S. networks and leading journals. He 
talked of "scoops" and of "exclusives," 
of "angles" that would catch the atten- 
tion of editors in the States. He also talk- 
ed of social developments and historical 
observations that I had not seen in his or 
any other dispatches coming our of Cen- 
tral America. After a while, he suggested, 
even the more conscientious reporter 
sends back what he thinks will get printed 
or broadcast rather than what he thinks is 
most important. And if the country in 
question has a different agenda is there 
any wonder that it would be dissatisfied 
with the kind of reporting that results 



from our brand of "freedom of the 
press"? 

The same situation, it seems to me, oc- 
curs on the most local level in our own 
country. Cable is giving us an opportunity 
to experiment with alternatives, always 
remembering that with our pure access 
channels there must be room for whatever 
alternative opinions people wish to ex- 
press. 

All over the world people are hungry 
for the kind of access to electronic media 
that cable has given many of us in the 
U.S. almost as a matter of course. There 
is no doubt that we must fight to maintain 
that access. We also must remember to 
use it responsibly, for we may well be set- 
ting patterns that will influence media use 
all over the world. 



George Stoney is a noted filmmaker and 
professor of film and video at New York 
University. 



NFLCP Calendar 

m 

October 11-13 The NFLCP Fall Regional 
Conference for the Central States will be 
held in Cleveland Heights, Ohio. Contact: 
Cathy Moats-Ols, 7 Severance Circle, 
Cleveland Heights, OH 44118, (216) 
291-4006. 



October 11-13 The NFLCP Fall Regional 
Conference for the Midatlantic will be held 
in Reading, Pennsylvania. Contact: Kate 
Stutzman, BCTV, 645 Perm Street, 
Reading, PA 19061, (215) 374-3065. 

m 

October 12-14 The NFLCP Fall Regional 
Conference tor the Midwest will be held 
in Minneapolis. Contact: Bootsie Ander- 
son, Group W Cable, 934 Woodhill Drive, 
Roseville, MN 55113, (612) 483-9471. 



m 

October 19-20 The NFLCP Fall Regional 
Conference for the Southwest will be held 
in Dallas. Contact: Barbara Dickson, 
AARP, 6440 N. Central, #304, Dallas, TX 
75206, (214) 369-9206 

November 2-3 The NFLCP Fall Regional 
Conference for the Southeast will be held 
in Tampa. Contact: Dave Olive, Tampa 
Cable, 4400 W. Buffalo Ave., Tampa, FL 
33614, (813) 877-6805. 

November 2-3 The NFLCP Fall Regional 
Conference for the Northeast will be held 
in Portland, Maine. Contact: Barbara 
Eberhardt, University of South Maine, 96 
Falmouth Street, Portland, ME 04101, (207) 
780-4470. 



m 

November 9-11 The Far West Region of 
the NFLCP will be holding a retreat at the 
Asilomar Conference Center. For more in- 
formation contact: Alicia Maldonado, 1945 
W. Helm Ave., Fresno, CA 93626, (209) 
252-8217. 



December 8 The NFLCP Fall Regional 
Conference for the Far West will be held 
in Santa Ana, California. For more infor- 
mation contact: Ken Fisher, 1010 Mac- 
Arthur Blvd. #7(5, Santa Ana, CA 92707, 
(714) 525-1191. 



8 Community Television Review 



Developing New Directions For Community 
Communications in Canada 



By Frank Spiller 

Cable community programming in 
Canada in 1984 is far different from what 
most idealists hoped for in the late 1960s 
and early 1970s. Concepts like access, par- 
ticipation, and community control, are 
much less evident, and most community 
channels provide a scaled down version of 
conventional television, In all but a very 
few cases the initiative for the program- 
ming rest squarely with the cable licensee, 
and such community participation and in- 
volvement that does take place is primar- 
ily achieved through the contribution of 
citizen volunteers to cable company pro- 
duced programming. Community channels 
have in effect become the local television 
service in many communities. 

Predictable Results 

In retrospect, the way the cable com- 
munity programming concept has evolved 
in Canada could have perhaps been pre- 
dicted. While the Canadian Radio, Tele- 
vision and Telecommunications Commis- 
sion's (CRTC) consistently strong encour- 
agement of the concept resulted in a 
relatively stable source of technical re- 
sources and operating funds from cable 
licensees, this advantage has to be weighed 
against the tendency which developed to 
constrain extensive community involve- 
ment because licensees, being ultimately 
responsible for the service, naturally tend- 
ed to adopt a cautious approach. With no 
existing models on which to base the com- 
munity channel concept, it was not sur- 
prising that conventional television prac- 
tices exerted a strong influence on the 
early planning and selection of cable com- 
pany resources and personnel. 

What of the future? Are there ways to 
continue to encourage more experimenta- 
tion and innovation? 

Leaving aside the critical influence of 
regulatory policy, it is clear that past and 
present practices represent a valuable 
learning experience. 

For example, the early notions of what 
community television might accomplish 
were far too idealistic. There just aren't a 
lot of people willing and anxious to use 
community television as a new means of 



communication and expression. Further- 
more, even with all the technical im- 
provements, television is a complex 
medium which simply does not lend itself 
to a simple communications process. It's 
as though we have expected the average 
person to suddenly become adept at 
public speaking without having learned 
how to read and write. We have also 
blithely assumed that the public's faltering 
efforts with this new medium can be given 
broad public exposure and in this way 
miraculously achieve some kind of ad- 
vanced forms of interpersonal and inter- 
community communication. Worst of all, 
we have looked to the general public to 
somehow comprehend all this and to ac- 
cept quite different visual styles on the 
same delivery system that provides mass 
entertainment. The miracle is that grass- 
roots television has found some accept- 
ance, although its inevitable drift towards 
conventional television formats is gen- 
erally observable. 

If the users of the newer media for com- 
munity communication and expression 
are to achieve any real success in the 
future, it is essential to build the concepts 
in new ways. As far as the Canadian expe- 
rience is concerned, two primary needs 
tend to stand out above all others. There 
is a need to achieve more community par- 
ticipation and control, and to develop the 
use of interactive systems. 

But even the acceptance of these two 
objectives will not suffice unless we are 
prepared to return to the basic require- 
ments for effective communication. This 
means recognizing the existence of a 
sender and a receiver; the necessity of the 
receiver to frame the communication in a 
way best suited to his/her knowledge and 
experience; and the needs of the receiver 
to both receive and accept the communi- 
cation, to exercise choice, and to interact 
with the sender. 

Utilizing Alternative 
Delivery Systems 

The expanding electronic distribution 
system is beginning to provide us with 
many more communications options with 



the result that we do not have to place all 
our hopes in television, and, in particular, 
in conventional television formats. Fur- 
thermore, we can combine various tech- 
niques such as audio and cable, computers 
and video, telephony and broadcasting. In 
other words, we can offer citizens and 
communities a number of differing forms 
of participation and, most importantly, 
we can begin to achieve selective routing 
of the communication — we don't have to 
remain forever with the concept of broad- 
casting, the one source to a mass of recip- 
ients. 

All this means we can introduce pros- 
pective participants to media opportun- 
ities at a level suited to their needs, expe- 
riences, and aptitudes. They may, for 
example, use voice only systems and par- 
ticipate in computer polling or in phone-in 
discussions. 

In the future, it would seem necessary to 
make a renewed effort to select personnel 
in charge of media facilities who can both 
provide conventional type services as well 
as be "facilitators" for community par- 
ticipation. Clearly, these two needs should 
not be separate but should be embodied in 
varying combinations in all services. 

Developing More 
Accessible Tools 

As more and more services are delivered 
nationally or internationally via satellites, 
it will become increasingly important to 
revise our present concepts of local ser- 
vices. In Canada we have demonstrated 
how the community access concept evolv- 
ed into a new low-cost local television ser- 
vice somewhat more akin to conventional 
off-air television than was originally en- 
visaged. This does not mean that commu- 
nity participation on a broad scale is 
unworkable; it only means that the right 
conditions and techniques for its effective 
development must be given far greater 
consideration. 

For example, a small cable system in 
Ontario invites subscribers to compose 
simple messages, statements, or com- 
ments. These are displayed on the com- 
munity channel in an alpha numeric for- 



Community Television Review 9 



NFLCP 

AUDIENCE 
RESEARCH 



mat. This simple device uses the written 
word— which most everyone can cope 
with— and invites various forms of re- 
sponse. The result has been a great deal of 
effective debate on major concerns in the 
community. Furthermore, it has probably 
been more effective, and certainly less 
costly and time consuming than a conven- 
tional television format. This does not re- 
place conventional television formats, it 
simply illustrates that community partici- 
pation can involve many forms of com- 
munication with conventional television 
formats being only one of many options 
available. 

In Canada our cable community pro- 
gramming experience has paved the way 
for new forms of conventional local televi- 
sion service involving a partnership be- 
tween the community volunteer and the 
cable company programmers. The early 
idealism about community television is 
over and we are now faced with a re- 
examination of the way in which an ex- 
panding electronic distribution system 
and an increasing range of new technolog- 
ical options can bring about a more effec- 
tive public relationship with all media. 

This means that we must continue to ex- 



plore new techniques of communication 
not limiting our efforts to community 
television but looking for ways to allow 
for new forms of public participation and 
control within every available media 
opportunity. 

In this way the potential for success is 
not only increased but the public access 
concept becomes more available to more 
people whatever their station or experi- 
ence. 

The tools at our disposal, whether to 
create and receive content or to interact 
with it, are as broad as our imagination 
allows, from the telephone, broadcasting 
and cable, to computers and cassettes. 

I am convinced that broad access objec- 
tives can be realized if we return to the 
basic principles of, and requirements for, 
effective communication, and build more 
choice, interactivity, and public participa- 
tion naturally and unobtrusively into our 
future content production and service 
development strategies for all media. 



Frank Spiller is President of Francis 
Spiller Associates in Nepean, Ontario, 



The first nation-wide compilation of com- 
munity programming viewership is current- 
ly being conducted by Western Michigan 
University for the National Federation of 
Local Cable Programmers. The research 
team is seeking all existing data and is ask- 
ing that copies of all questionnaires and 
other research instruments used in local au- 
dience surveys, along with written inter- 
pretation of results, either in narrative or 
quantitative form, be sent to them for in- 
clusion in the compilation. 

If your access center, local origination 
service, or other community programming 
facility is considering conducting audience 
research in the near future, the WMU team 
will be available to help with instrument 
design and will attempt to answer questions 
regarding other areas of audience research 
such as sampling techniques, project report- 
ing and public relations value of resulting 

It is recommended that those consider- 
ing an audience study review a new addi- 
tion to the NFLCP Educational Packet 
Series titled, Audience Survey, available for 
$1100 from NFLCP, 906 Pennsylvania Ave., 
SE, Washington, DC 20003. 

To be most useful for the current NFLCP 
study, the research team is asking that cer- 
tain critical questions be included in any 
planned local surveys. These questions 
should focus on the availability of communi- 
ty programming services as related to con- 
sumer decisions to initially subscribe to 
cable service and whether such communi- 
ty programming plays a part in decisions 
to renew subscription. Cross-referencing of 
responses is encouraged by asking similar 
questions in the negative, such as, "How 
would you feel if community programming 
were not a part of your cable TV service?" 
Please forward results of existing studies, 
whether or not they include this material! 

To be included in this national study, 
survey results must be in the hands of the 
research team by mid-to late-October of 
1984. 

Contact: Prof. Frank R. Jamison 
Head of Media Services 
Western Michigan University 
Kalamazoo, MI 49008-3899 




A volunteer operates camera for a community channel in Ontario. 



10 Community Television Review 



Public Access in Great Britain 



By Lauren-Glenn Davitian 

The heart of British public access television 
lies in that country's tradition of public ser- 
vice broadcasting and documentary truth. 
Since the advent of radio, television, and film, 
British producers have established these media 
as cornerstones of national culture and 
democratic virtue. In 1922, John Reith 
dedicated the British Broadcasting Corpora- 
tion to the "maintenance of high standards, the 
provision of the best and the rejection of the 
hurtful." John Grierson, British documentary 
pioneer, saw non-fiction films as the oppor- 
tunity to "open up the screen to the real 
world." 

Fifty years of British media may be viewed 
as the struggle between public service ideals, 
the imperatives of popular programming and 
the concentration of distribution and produc- 
tion resources into the hands of bureaucrats 
in the national information networks (known 
as the BBC-ITV duopoly). 

The Alternative Commercial 
Network 

The most recent effort to restore balance to 
British media services is the development of 
the second commercial channel (ITV2), or 
Channel 4. 

The mission of Channel 4's "commission- 
ing editors" (most programs are produced out- 
of-house) is to cater to interest groups 
neglected by other national media and to pro- 
vide a venue for independent film and video- 
makers. In spite of their intention to institute 
a greater sense of public accountability, Chan- 
nel 4 encounters the same problems faced by 
every broadcast enterprise. They must main- 
tain at least 14 percent of the national audience 
share, and turn to "popular," "light" program- 
ming to do so. As a result, they are alreading 
using independent producers less frequently, 
and many groups and producers are disap- 
pointed that the Channel is not the access 
panacea that was promised. 

Yet, the observer cannot be too critical. 
Channel 4 has made headway into the staun- 
chly unionized broadcasting industry. They 
negotiated the "Workshop Declaration", allow- 
ing independent producers and regional film 
and video workshops to provide their pro- 
grams to network audiences. Seventeen of 
more than fifty workshops are eligible for this 
program, entitling at least four members to an- 



nual salaries of 8000 pounds (nearly $12,000). 

Recognizing these Workshops to be a source 
of innovative material, Channel 4 has more 
than doubled the funding previously available 
to local media projects. The Channel has 
dedicated more than $1,000,000 in equipment 
and programming budgets to twenty media 
projects. 

The British Film Institute (BFI) en- 
thusiastically endorses the Declaration, noting 
that "these production bases give stabiity and 
continuity to their work by concerning 
themselves with their audiences: by 
distributing their product, by developing new 
audiences for it with education, and by con- 
fronting filmmakers with their responsibility 
to their audience/' 

With this attention from Channel 4, BFI, 
and unions, the door has opened wide tor the 
possibility of domestic (and even international) 
distribution of socially relevant programs pro- 
duced by local media workshops. 

Decentralizing The Means Of 
Production 

The first attempts to truly decentralize media 
production in Britian could not occur until 
video equipment became profitable enough 
to move out of the hands of the professionals 
and into the neighborhoods. 

Inspired by the technical possibilities of low- 
guage video and innovative projects, such as 
the NFBC's "Challenge for Change/La Societe 
Nouvelle", North-American and British media 
makers moved into the streets, schools and 
social clubs with their equipment. 

In the late 1960s, media workshops appeared 
in working class communities throughout the 
country. Educated producers, interested in em- 
powering the young, elderly, unemployed - 
taught video, photography, radio and 
newspaper production. 

While the first American experiments with 
low guage video production depended upon 
the resources of local cable operators, British 
producers relied upon grants from local arts 
councils and sympathetic foundations for both 
equipment and program funding. Crude as 
many of these projects seem, they provided 
real alternatives to national programming (that 
did not always address local needs and issues) . 



Viewed in the local context, home-made, 
hand-made media reinforced each communi- 
ty's picture of themselves. 

Relying upon close circuit distribution in 
churches, union halls and truck hoods, videos 
could be seen anywhere there was an audience 
and an outlet for the monitor. These projects 
were the crux of access. 

The film and video workshops evolved into 
two types of production facilities: those that 
continue to be interested in the "process' 1 of 
hands-on community instruction and em- 
powerment, and those concerned with a social- 
ly relevant "product" that reaches large and 
distant audiences. 

It is not surprising that many of these groups 
struggle with one foot in the community center 
and the other in the sophisticated sound stage. 
Many of the media workers want to affect a 
larger audience without abandoning their 
original ideals and devoted local supporters. 
Phil Stuart of the Edinburgh Film Trust notes 
that "video and filmmakers who have been 
working in the community for a long time 
finally have the chance to show their work on 
a national medium. In many cases, their con- 
cern for community work goes out the win- 
dow. This is understandable, since they want 
to speak to more people and make a living do- 
ing what they want to do. Although we (the 
Film Trust) are partly supported by Channel 
4 (they received several thousand pounds for 
a new editing suite and a commission for a 
piece on the disabled) we are struggling to find 
a way to incorporate the work we do within 
the community into the programs we produce 
for Channel 4." 

In light of the appeal of Channel 4's national 
audience and the diminishing lustre of the 
close circuit community, what is the alternative 
for the local producer? Where can communi- 
ty workers showcase their work, teach their 
neighbors and support their habit? 

Cable Television 

Since cable services were not necessary to 
provide off-air channels, operators in Great 
Britain pinned their hopes for an audience on 
Pay-TV and local programming. In 1972 the 
Labour government, wary of the implications 
of commercial services, rejected any plans for 
Pay-TV services. However, later that year, the 
newly elected Conservative government, eager 



Community Television Review 11 




to develop any kind of industry, awarded 
preliminary licenses to five cable operators, 
with the provision that their programming "be 
specifically designed to appeal to local tastes 
and interests". 

In the hope that they could soon prosper 
from commercial offerings, cable operators 
enthusiastically endowed local pilot projects 
with budgets of up to 80,000 pounds. 

In the first two years, Swindon Viewpoint, 
Sheffield Cablevision, Cable Vision of Well- 
ingborough and Bristol Channel, are produc- 
ing between 2 and 12 hours of original pro- 
g ramming each week. Programs dealt with the 
elderly, young mothers, unemployed, current 
events, sports, theatre and community bulletin 
boards. One observer noted "the relentlessly 
local nature of the material is unmistakable". 

The only publicly funded cable access ex- 
periment began at Milton Keynes Housing 
estate in 1976. As a community information 
service, Channel 40 became an essential part 
of planning a self-contained and sufficient 
"new town". The Channel's founder, Michael 
Barrett (formerly of Swindon Viewpoint) 
comments: 
"The fact is that a lot of the things that most 
of us know most about are very banal, or- 
dinary, everyday things. That's why I'm con- 
vinced that this sort of community televi- 
sion is not about the newsworthly or the 
special or the unusual, it is about the or- 
dinary and the everyday." 
The ordinary and the everyday does not 
cultivate a large subscriber base and cable 
operators were disappointed with the access 
experiments. When the 1984 Labour govern- 
ment declined to set a date for the installation 
of a national cable service, the operators stop- 
ped funding the local centers. 

Swindon Viewpoint and Sheffield Cable- 
Vision tried to generate programming without 
a dependable source of revenue, only to 
languish and die. The sole survivor, Green- 
which CableVision continues to produce local 
programs on a limited basis, and serves as part 
of the first Pay-TV project initiated by That- 
cher's government. 

The State of Access 

The Labour Party opposes the commercial 
development of cable television as a threat to 
British broadcasting's public service tradition. 



The Conservative Party greets all information 
technologies as the solution for domestic 
unemployment and a means toward interna- 
tional prestige. 

The opposing Parties agree on one point: 
the potential of cable to serve as a unique 
forum for local issues. 

Annan's Committee on the Future of Broad- 
casting notably skirts the issue of cable (in the 
hope that it will disappear) except to argue 
against pay-TV and to comment that communi- 
ty television: 

"extends the number of program makers and 
takes the program makers out of the charm- 
ed circle of professionals; and this in turn 
creates a more alert and selective television 
audience. Cable television is one of the best 
ways in which a local community is able to 
communicate with itself." 
Lord Hunt's 1982 "Inquiry into Cable Ex- 
pansion and Broadcasting Policy" (commis- 
sioned by the Thatcher administration) states: 
"we believe that there should be a presump- 
tion that the cable operator should accept 
responsibility for ensuring and financially 
assisting some community participation in 
cable programmes and we hope that cable 
systems' relationship with and contribution 
to their local communities might become a 
source of mutual pride." 
Neither report specifies how community ac- 
cess services can operate. Annan fails to lay 
any ground work for commercially viable 
cable services that would support access, while 
Hunt presumes that the cable operator's in- 
herant sense of citizenship will result in work- 
ing access projects. 

Yet, the recent round of franchise negotia- 
tions disclosed few such intentions on the part 
of the cable operators. Nor does it seem that 
the government, in its eagerness to promote 
economic development, will assert any 
authority through the Cable Television Bill 
now before Parliament. 

Community workers, practiced from years 
of media workshops, pilot access projects and 
relevant causes, are feverishly busy alerting 
legislators and the public of the importance 
of a public access mandate. 

A recent conference in Leicester, England 
brought community workers and activists 
together to discuss an agenda to insure a public 
access policy bestowing local autonomy upon 



the communities that will be cabled in the 
coming years. They proposed to combat the 
centralized control of cable services through 
the establishment of local task forces of 
film/videoworksrs, educators, librarians and 
city councillors. They plan to exert union 
pressure through the ACTT, who opposes the 
current cable bill, and to encourage the Labour 
Party to formulate a progressive cable policy. 
The Labour controlled Greater London Coun- 
cil and Sheffield City Council issued a joint 
paper stating that public and educational ac- 
cess channels should be provided and funded. 

There is ample evidence that such channels 
would be used by the community and serve 
to balance the commercial interest of cable 
operators— restoring some aspect of Britain's 
public service tradition to the rapidly develop- 
ing information technologies. 

Lauren-Glenn Davitian is with Chittenden 
Community Television in Burlington, Vermont, 



v 




Culture Shock will present a 



weekly, hour Ions television almanac showcasing 
"alternative video/" Culture Shock is a forum for an 
outrageously eclectic mix of upbeat att zat film 
and video shorts from ten seconds to ten minutes. 
CULTURE SHOCK WANTS YOUR INNOVATIVE VTDCOS 
Send us your work directly or write for further details; 

CULTURE SHOCK 

Box 1462, Middleburg, VA 221 1 7 



12 Community Television Review 



Community Programming in the Netherlands 



By Nick Jankowski 

The Netherlands means to many people 
no more than the stereotypical images of 
tulips, wooden shoes and a little boy hold- 
ing back the sea with his finger stuck in 
the dike. There is much more to this little 
country, however, and community com- 
munications is one of its most interesting 
stories. 

Looking Backwards: 
Community Television 
in the 1970s: 

In October 1971, a group of residents in 
Melick-Herkenbosch , a small town in the 
southern part of the country, realized that 
it was relatively easy to 4 'plug into" the 
cable network and to distribute their own 
television programs. This group, led by 
the town mayor, transmitted a city council 
debate to the 36 households on the cable 
system in the community. A week later 
another group, located in Amsterdam, 
cablecast the illegal occupation of a 
neighborhood center. 

At that time locally produced cable tele- 
vision programs were not covered by 
Dutch communications law. A ware of this 
gap in the regulations, these and other 
groups around the country began making 
plans to transmit video programs over the 
cable systems. However, the Dutch gov- 
ernment subsequently enacted a decree 
prohibiting transmission of local pro- 
gramming without prior governmental au- 
thorization. At the same time, however, 
the government conceded there might be 
potential value in such local electronic 
communication. The government agreed 
to support a national experiment with the 
new medium. 

After three years of negotiation, six 
communities were selected to participate 
in this experiment. A culturally represen- 
tative organization from each community 
was funded by the government to pur- 
chase equipment, set up a studio, hire per- 
sonnel, and produce radio and television 
programs. 

The official experiment began in 1975 
and continued until early 1978. Three in- 
dependent research teams were also fund- 
ed to study the development and use of 



the medium, and they made the following 
observations: 

• nonprofessionals could produce tele- 
vision and radio programs of interest to 
their communities; 

• viewership of the programs ranged 
between 20 and 30 percent, figures com- 
parable to those achieved by some na- 
tional programs; 

§ the programs were viewed by a cross 
section of the population within the six 
communities; and 

• younger residents tended to become 
more involved in program production ac- 
tivities than older residents. 

The results are mixed regarding the ex- 
tent to which this programming contrib- 
uted to the process of community devel- 
opment—one of the fundamental goals of 
community programming. The informa- 
tional part of this process was generally 
achieved, but there is insufficient evidence 
as to whether the stations contributed to 
the mobilization of residents in communi- 
ty affairs— the second and more impor- 
tant aspect of the community develop- 
ment process. 

This experiment terminated in 1978. 
Five of the original six community sta- 
tions were able to find local sources of 
funding to continue their operations; the 
sixth folded for lack of funds. 

Community Television 
in the 1980s: 

After the national experiment there was 
a great deal of interest from municipalities 
and community groups to extend and re- 
fine use of the medium. The government, 
however, refused to grant permits for ex- 
tensive experimentation. Finally, due in 
part to pressure applied through the 
emergence of radio and television pirates, 
the government issued a White Paper in 
1983 which included guidelines for com- 
munity communications. The White Paper 
included the following requirements on 
community programming channels: 

• the station organization had to be 
"culturally representative" of the com- 
munity in which it operated; 

• the local government was to decide 



which station organization would receive 
a franchise to produce programs; 

# advertising was prohibited; 

# transmissions were to be made only 
through cable networks; and 

# funding was to come from local or 
regional sources. 

The points in this White Paper have 
been strongly debated, and since release 
of the document several changes have 
been made. No longer, for example, does 
the local government have the last say in 
whether a station comes to the communi- 
ty. The city council has but an advisory 
voice; now the Ministry of Culture and 
later a special commission will make the 
ultimate decision. There is also some 
room for developing local programming 
on low-power television. This month 
(September, 1984) a conference is being 
held to allocate frequencies to European 
countries. It has been calculated that the 
Netherlands may be able to construct 500 
low-power stations. 

About a year before the White Paper, 
in December 1981, local groups concerned 
with local origination programming form- 
ed an organization designed to lobby for 
community television and provide support 
services to new initiatives. This organiza- 
tion, Local Broadcasters in the Nether- 
lands (OLON), serves much the same pur- 
pose as the NFLCP does in the United 
States. 

In 1984 the OLON received a grant 
from the national government to expand 
its assistance to new community stations 
around the country. Two field workers 
are advising groups on organization struc- 
ture, fund raising and programming 
policy; another three staff members are 
upgrading the documentation facilities of 
the national office and developing train- 
ing programs and publications. This grant 
is due to expire at the end of the year, but 
the staff is hopeful that it will be renewed. 

Funding has been the most pressing 
problem for all community stations in the 
country. Advertising, as already mention- 
ed, is not presently allowed on community 
cable operations. This means that one of 
the potentially lucrative funding sources 
for local programming has been denied. It 



Community Television Review 13 




is also not the practice in the Netherlands 
(unlike the United States) for cable com- 
panies to fund community programming. 
Therefore, the only funding sources re- 
maining are: local government subsidies, 
donations, membership dues and com* 
mercial use of video equipment. 

None of these revenue sources have 
much to offer. Most local governments 
are either unwilling or unable to contrib- 
ute much to local programming budgets. 
In addition, donations are rare, and dues 
are negligible. Commercial activity may 
prove to be profitable, but there is also the 
danger that it detracts the station from its 
original purpose — developing program- 
ming for the community. Many stations 
hope the restriction on advertising will 
change and that this will solve their finan- 
cial problems* However, there is a con- 
cern that community programming might 
come under commercial control. There- 
fore, OLON recommends that this fund- 
ing source never exceed 30 percent of the 
annual budget. 

In 1984, 120 local programming opera- 
tions had either developed formal organi- 
zational structures or were in the process 
of doing so. Another 100 groups have 
been developing such structures and 
bonds with their communities. In addi- 
tion, 25 stations have received franchises 
from their local governments and have 
been programming on a weekly basis. 
Limited funding prompted most of these 
groups to develop radio in the initial 
stages of activity rather than television. 

The Coming Years 

Community radio and television has 
secured a slot in the national media policy 
debate. There is seldom a proclamation 
from the government which does not at 
least mention community communica- 
tions. However, community programming 
is no longer in the limelight. The emphasis 
is now on new information and communi- 
cation services. These services are an old 
story to people in the U.S. who have fol- 
lowed cable developments for the past 
decade — or who live in areas served by ad- 
vanced cable technology. Two experiments 



with interactive telecommunications are 
now on the testing bench in the Nether- 
lands. In both of them, forms of commu- 
nity television are being developed, but it 
is peripheral to the core of these projects. 
The government and communications in- 
dustries are concerned with interactive 
services, not with locally produced pro- 
grams or public access. In a sense, com- 
munity television has become a token in 
the total package of services— a kind of 
entry card for the commercial services. 

In addition to the experiments with in- 
teractive cable television, there is also a 
great deal of interest in locally produced 
television for foreign laborers living in the 
country. This minority programming has 
received substantial financial assistance 
from the national government. Officials 
are hoping that programming directed at 
Moroccan and Turkish laborers will help 
reduce some of the socialization problems 
these nationalities face. But people who 
have examined the plans and pretentions 
of these experiments suspect there is little 
chance that these programs will seriously 



contribute to what has become a major 
social problem— the large percentage of 
migrant workers living in the country. 

Community programming has now be- 
come a minor institution in the Nether- 
lands. It is nationally recognized, and has 
deep roots in a number of communities. 
However, the idealism surrounding this 
movement in the early 1970s has faded; in 
its place has come concern with the day- 
to-day routine of developing and main- 
taining a station, Toos Bastiaansen, an 
OLON staff member, sees this as a tempo- 
rary concern, "Later, once the stations 
get off the gound, once they solve some of 
their immediate problems—then I think 
they will have time to consider some of the 
more philosophical questions of com- 
munity television.'* 



Nick Jankowski is a former Calif omian 
teaching and doing research at the Insti- 
tute of Mass Communications on the 
Catholic University Campus in Nijegan, 
Holland, 




14 Community Television Review 



France Enters the Cable Age 



By Adam Steg 

We all know what a haphazard process the 
development of electronic media has been in 
the U.S. Various structures of hardware, pro- 
gramming, and legislation have come and gone 
as victims of the whims of private commerce 
and changing fashions in public policy. This 
has not been so in France where a tight reign 
has been held on the control and expansion 
of radio and television in the postwar period. 
Although many have justifiably lamented the 
isolationism, the older technology and rigid 
politics of French media — the delayed 
development of new systems has had a signifi- 
cant benefit. As much as U.S. cities late in the 
franchising game have benefitted from new 
hardware developments and have learned from 
the mistakes made in earlier franchises, 
French cable policy draws a great deal on the 
experience of her European neighbors and the 
U.S. 

Development of French Cable 
Policy 

The first major step for cable communica- 
tions in France came with the Audiovisual 
Communication Law which abolished the state 
broadcasting monopoly in 1982. Cable net- 
works for TV and other services can now be 
built at the initiative of local government 
authorities, which for the first time can take 
partners from private enterprise and have full 
local control over services, subject to 
reasonable constraints such as prior authoriza- 
tion for TV services, "must carry" channels, 
and a guarantee to implement interactive 
services. 

The French government has not, however, 
taken the franchise approach of the United 
States and Great Britain. All cable networks 
will be installed, owned and operated by 
France Telecom, an arm of the French PTT 
(Post & Telecommunications Service). France 
Telecom will then, in turn, make the facilities 
available for a fee to each local cable TV com- 
pany. The local cable company will typically 
be a joint venture between a local authority, 
the national broadcasting authority (Tele- 
Diffusion de France, or TDF) and private sec- 
tor partners. An ambitious 10-year plan calls 
for local networks in the next 3 years reaching 
1.4 million households, with an eventual goal 
of 6 million homes by 1992. During this cabl- 
ing period, a new broadcast pay-TV service 



called Canal Plus is intended to partially 
satisfy the strong video demand until the 
availability of the new cable networks. The 
channel will build its appeal on feature films, 
using a scrambled picture and inexpensive 
decoders in subscribers' homes. Although 
there will be no advertising as such , program 
sponsorships will be sold. Unlike the "radio 
lib res," or private radio stations which have 
proliferated since the state monopoly abolition, 
the H.A. does not foresee the granting of 
licenses to private broadcast stations for at 
least 15 years, for according to Bernard 
Schreiner, France's main objective in televi- 
sion is to create the national interactive cable 
system. 

In giving the green light for cable networks, 
the government insisted that maximum use be 
made of advanced technologies and methods. 
These include: switched-star topology for net- 
works, optical fibers, addressability, and 
interactivity. 

Biarritz: A Model for the 
Future? 

The trial optical cable network at Biarritz, 
in southwestern France, is the world's largest 
in terms of connected subscribers and the 
range of services available. Opened early in 
1984, the network connects a total of 1,500 
subscribers and 300 businesses or other pro- 
fessional users. 

The optical fiber network at Biarritz has 
been designed for interactive distribution of 
TV and stereo sound programs, for switched 
videophone/telephone services, and for 
videotex and supervideotex. The system will 
allow one household to watch two different TV 
programs, listen to stereo FM, and use the 
videophone— all simultaneously from a single 
pair of optical fibers. France Telecom supplies 
subscribers with a terminal which combines 
a videophone/telephone with a videotex 
keyboard and service controls. The subscriber 
then provides his own television, stereo set, 
and VCR, if desired. 

The Biarritz system is engineered to provide 
15 video program channels and 12 FM stereo 
sound channels. Designed for the subscribers* 
TV sets, the video program channels include 
relays of the 3 French networks, French- 
language channels from Belgium and 
Switzerland, channels from nearby Spain, and 



two satellite-delivered pay channels (the 
British Sky Channel and TV5, a multinational 
French language service). Users will also have 
access to an innovative program access ser- 
vice planned for all French cable systems 
known as the program bank. The program 
bank is designed to let the viewer select the 
programming himself on the special channel, 
using his videotex terminal to peruse the 
catalog of available shows. During times of 
heavy demand, the program bank will offer 
an "a la carte" menu of a limited number of 
programs at any one time. These selections 
will be determined by subscriber voting, where 
each household will have a certain number of 
"voting points*' for each month, allowing the 
subscriber to indicate his preferences on an 
interactive converter. In theory, this will allow 
the content of the program bank menu to 
reflect the collective preferences of the com- 
munity. At off-peak times, any program in the 
bank can be accessed by each subscriber. 

The switched services at Biarritz provide the 
establishment of bidirectional audio and 
audic^picture connections. These include 
videophone and telephone services, and 
videotex and supervideotex. Videophones 
C'picturephones") have picture quality to 
enable the correspondent to read a document 
placed in front of the videophone camera. 
Videotex accesses the large Antiope videotex 
services, phone directories, and other infor- 
mation services implemented throughout 
France for years. 

Supervideotex combines videodiscs with text 
to provide live-action pictures for such services 
as teleshopping catalogs. 

Coming Back to Earth: 
Economic Realities 

The impressive experimental system at Biar- 
ritz is just that — experimental. Designed to 
test the hardware and systems of a state-of-the- 
art French fiber optics network, we arc un- 
sure whether all of Biarritz's features will 
become standardized nationwide. Indeed, 
some have criticized the H.A. decision to push 
for a standardized fiber-optic system. Mayor 
Jean-Marie Rausch of the northeastern city of 
Metz recently signed an accord for a feasibility 
study of extending the present coaxial system 
in Metz, where 7,500 subscribers out of 35,000 
homes passed have received cable service for 



Community Television Review 15 




a number of years, Referring to the fiber op- 
tic commitment, Rausch said, "France is too 
poor to permit the creation of another Con- 
corde." However, even Rausch admits that the 
long-term implications of a national fiber-optic 
network are too important. The study for Metz 
will provide for the eventual conversion from 
coaxial cable to fiber optics. 

There is an enormous enthusiasm for cable 
on the part of municipal authorities throughout 
France. Mayors and other local politicians see 
enlarged TV and video services as vote get- 
ters. Well over 100 local authorities, represen- 
ting more than 10 million inhabitants, have 
made initial contact with French Telecom, and 
in about 40 cities (7 million inhabitants) 
technical and Financial feasibility studies are 
already under w^r. Although profitability is 
not the only concern, it is certainly at the top 
of the list of concerns. 

Perhaps the biggest support for fiber optics 
has come from Jacques Chirac, the Mayor of 
Paris. Chirac declared Paris ready to let the 
P.T.T. begin installing for 50,000 homes, star- 
ting in 1985. A condition he would impose, 
however, is that the City of Paris be given more 
freedom to program the system to ensure 
financial viability. What concerns Rausch, 
Chirac and others is the H. A. policy to limit 
foreign programming on cable to 30%, an 
amount which goes against the potential for 
imminent cable programming from present 
and forthcoming Luxembourg and British 
satellites, as well as transborder programm- 
ing from nearby Germany. Rausch's coaxial 
system could relay programs from these 
sources right now; Chirac's Paris fiber-optic 
system could recoup some of the enormous 
costs with leased channels and advertising. A 
recent survey concluded that 19% of Parisians 
surveyed would pay the required 750 francs 
(about $95) signup tax and 120 francs per 
month ($15) to receive nine channels. In ten 
years, it is estimated that 50% of Paris could 
be subscribing to cable, or nearly 3 million 
people. 

Thus, there is a strong financial pressure 
borne on the one hand by the Franch cities, 
who see cable as a potential revenue source 
if left in a free market, and on the other hand, 
by program suppliers, notably from the U.S. 
HBO and the major studios are waiting in the 
wings with the American-developed Coronet 



satellite project developed in association with 
Luxembourg. To them, a deregulated French 
cable market would be another goldmine. It 
should be noted that one of the most popular 
programs on French TV is Dallas; it has been 
estimated that 60 % of entertainment program- 
ming on Western European TV screens came 
from non-European sources. 



Whither Access In France? 

One of the conspicuous absences in French 
cable policy, as set by the Mission Schreiner 
and the Haute Authorite, is any provision for 
public access as we know it. Although the pro- 
gram bank plan provides subsidies for local 
groups to engage production houses to pro- 
duce programs on their interests for cable, 
there is no provision for direct access or train- 
ing. The experimental cable system in Greno- 
ble did produce some local access program- 
ming but it was largely discontinued due to 
the lack of an audience- 
After consulting the Mission Schreiner on 
this lack of access interest, some explanations 
can be offered. First of all, France is still in 
the very early stages of cable. The fascination 
of any channels over three is still an impor- 
tant element. Moreover, French society is 
highly structured into professions. Few French 
people, it has been said, could ever imagine 
that they could produce their own program- 
ming. Another element is that French media 
are often sticklers for very high production 
values. Film is still the medium of choice in 
broadcast production, especially on location. 
The concept of the access process and message 
being more important than the "look" of the 
show is still far off. Nonetheless, the Mission 
Schreiner estimates that once the City of Paris 
receives cable for a few years, the many 
special interest groups which have used film 
to dramatize their cause will create the 
pressure that will eventually result in access 
provisions. Another potential resource is the 
strong regional identify of areas of the coun- 
try such as the Provence, Brittany and Nor- 
mandy, where a flourishing amount of poetry, 
social discourse and song is produced in 
regional dialects. Some of this has already 
found its way on to the French Regional Net- 
work (FR-3), and it is likely that these groups 



will have a voice on cable systems in their own 
cities. 



Adam Steg is Director of Media Relations for 
the French Cultural Services in New Orleans. 




Announcing . . . 



THE CABLE JOB GUIDE 

Describes entry-level opportunities in: 
% cable systems 
% program production & services 
% engineering 
% government 
% law 

% related fields 
Includes 15 appendices of "Who's Who" 
in the cable industry, government, press, 
citizens' groups, plus placement services 
and training programs. {54 pages, $9.50 
postpaid.) 

Also . , , 



THE COMMUNITY MEDIUM 

The state of the art in cable. Includes 
technology overview, glossary, case 
studies of local programming, two-way 
services, educational uses. (180 pages, 
$18.50 postpaid.) 



A GUIDE FOB LOCAL POLICY 

Discusses legal and policy issues in 
cable, Covers franchising process, 
ordinances, consumer protection, 
franchise enforcement and 
administration, other issues. (130 pages, 
$18,50 postpaid.) 

$31 .50 postpaid for set of two. Discounts 
available for bulk orders. 



Call or write for free brochure: 

The Cable Television Information Center 
1500 North Beauregard Street 
Alexandria, VA 22311 
(703) 845-1705 



16 Community Television Review 



Community Video in Israel — 
A View From Kibbutzim 



By George C. Stoney 

Ein Dor is one of the jewels of Israel's 
kibbutz movement which now has 130,000 
members in over 300 cooperative commu- 
nities. 

Founded in the late 1940s by Socialist 
enthusiasts coming mostly from Europe 
and North America, Ein Dor soon devel- 
oped an agricultural base using "appro- 
priate technology,' ' and prospered using 
only a small percent of the available labor. 
They subsequently turned to manufactur- 
ing and have prospered even more with 
the production of high quality cable, in- 
cluding co-axial cable which is essential 
for cable TV. 

A few years ago Ein Dor created its own 
closed-circuit cable system with results so 
familiar that reciting them will set stu- 
dents of modern communications technol- 
ogy to nodding their heads in recognition. 

First came a community antenna tall 
enough to reach beyond the Israeli gov- 
ernment's single (and heavily censored) 
channel to bring in programs from Syria, 
Jordan and Egypt. "Some people wanted 
to improve their language skills," ex- 
plained Yeshoshua Zamir when I visited 
Ein Dor a few years ago, "and a lot more 
wanted to see the wider coverage of inter- 
national sporting events." Viewing took 
place in two large meeting rooms and be- 
came a popular group activity, especially 
when there was an important soccer match 
on. Then the governors of the kibbutz de- 
cided to extend cable to individual homes, 
and the results were quite predictable. 

People no longer watched TV in groups 
Many came to the communal dining hall 
with trays so they could return home to 
eat in front of their TV sets. Attendance at 
cultural functions declined sharply. Even 
attendance at the weekly community meet- 
ings dropped off. The cooperative spirit 
of the kibbutz was threatened. What to 
do? 

I first met Zamir when he was ponder- 
ing this question. He had just served his 
term as head of the kibbutz and was back 
in the factory making cable when I came 
to Israel on a USIA-sponsored tour to talk 
about community media. He had read 
about community cable in Canada and the 
U.S. and was wondering if there was a 



way they could use their closed circuit sys- 
tem to reinforce group awareness. Thus 
began a friendship, enriched by frequent 
exchanges of letters as Zamir struggled to 
persuade Ein Dor's managers that spend- 
ing precious foreign exchange on a porta- 
pak was a wise investment. It took more 
than two years. 

Last fall Zamir (an American who 
joined Ein Dor in 1947) traveled across 
the U.S. to see for himself what cable ac- 
cess was like in this country, bringing 
copies of some representative tapes from 
Ein Dor and from a neighboring kibbutz. 
All were originated on Beta Vi " in the 
PAL format. We had them transferred to 
Va " NTSC format so Americans could see 
how Ein Dor is using the technology. (The 
photographs accompanying this article 
were copied from some of these tapes.) 
Though spoken in Hebrew and Arabic 
and with the color and technical quality 
greatly diminished by the multiple trans- 
fers, the tapes, nevertheless, convey a 
spirit of cooperation, compassion and in- 
tellectual intensity that makes them mod- 
els of video as a community medium. 

The Tapes Are Bitter and Sweet 

First, the bitter: We Protest the War in 
Lebanon recounts a trip by Ein Dor's 
video group to Jerusalem the day after the 
1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Here 
for the first time in their lives they experi- 
enced intervention by the police when they 
tried to speak out. Two days later Zamir 1 s 
own son was killed in that same war, 

"Tapes like this are very important for 
people in kibbutzim to see/' explained 
Carlos Ierushalmi, the video training of- 
ficer for Givat Haviva, the central educa- 
tional authority for HaShoner HaTzair, 
the more radical wing of the kibbutz 
movement. "It is too easy for us to live in 
kibbutzim, isolated from the realities of 
Israeli life. So we often deliberately go out 
to find what ordinary Israeli citizens 
think," 

How We Pick Cotton in Ein Dor was 
made by the small cadre of people who 
still farm to show how methods have 
changed since a majority of the members 



were engaged in agriculture. The low 
angle shots of machines and the montage 
cutting that makes cotton pickers "dance" 
to Israeli pop music suggests that all those 
Eisenstein films featured in Ein Dor's 
movie series have been seen with some at- 
tention. 

First Night Without Mother explains 
how and why Ein Dor takes in 30-odd 
children from troubled homes each year 
for schooling and nurturing. It gives the 
youngsters a chance to introduce them- 
selves by talking about their hobbies and 
their hopes for the year. The tape was 
played five times in the first week the chil- 
dren were in kibbutz so they could be 
greeted as individuals when seen in the 
communal dining hall and around the 
pool. 

Arab Wedding is a thirty-minute ac- 
count, beautifully and thoughtfully shot, 
of a celebration in a village literally just 
across the road from Ein Dor but which, 
for most Israelis, remains an alien (per- 
haps even an alienating) experience. The 
tape was made by Ein Dor volunteers 
headed by a plumber who worked with an 
Arab plumber (the brother of the groom). 
The event unfolds chronologically and 
with precise observations through the day- 
long preparation of food, the annointing 
of the groom amid male dancing the night 
before, and on through the day and eve- 
ning of the main ceremony. The tape was 




The brother of the groom from an Arab 
Wedding, 



Community Television Review 1 7 




seen on cassette players in the Arab village 
as well as on Ein Dor's closed circuit 
cable. 

A companion tape is: Making A Brazier 
the Traditional Way in which the resident 
archaeologist (and also a school teacher) 
from Ein Dor is seen working along side 
an Arab woman who outlines the proce- 
dure while Jewish and Arab children lend 
a hand. 

"My goal/* the Archaeologist notes, 
"is to make members of Ein Dor aware 
that other people also have traditions that 
run deep in this soil." 

It was the possibility of using video as a 
device to encourage some kind of dialogue 
between Israelis and Arabs that first at- 
tracted Yehoshua Zamir to the medium, 
and it is a dream he has not forsaken in 
spite of all the discouragements. A gifted 
stills photographer, he has produced two 
books and several exhibitions dealing with 
this matter. His most recent is a volume of 
text and photographs about his son killed 
in Lebanon. An English edition is to be 
published in the U.S. in 1985, 

Closed Circuit Dialogue 

Other tapes in the collection include one 
in which young people indicate what their 
role should be on the kibbutz— the year 
following their obligatory army service— 
which lasts 36 months for men and 24 
months for women, This tape was made in 
preparation for a meeting of the entire 
membership where the matter was to be 
decided. Repeatedly on the tape the 
speakers comment on how much easier 
they feel about expressing themselves on 
video than when facing the entire assem- 
bly in person. 

Other tapes celebrate festivals, record 
dances and promote a clean-up campaign 
with emphasis on what children can do. 



Video Shock 

Today Ein Dor is one of 50-odd kib- 
butzim using video and closed circuit cable 
for community development. HaShoner 
HaTzair, also has a video center where 
Carlos Ierushalmi works full time. The 



center does editing and duplicating for its 
member communities and makes certain 
training and informational tapes useful to 
all. 

"But the most important thing we do is 
Video Shock, which is how I like to de- 
scribe our workshops in community 
video/' Ierushalmi told me recently while 
on a visit to New York University's video 
facility, Each session of Video Shock 
brings 36 kibbutz members together for 
three weeks of intensive fieldwork and 
theoretical training. The former has been 
designed by Prof. Nisan Belkan of Tel 
Aviv University; the latter by Prof. Dov 
Shinhar of Hebrew University in Jerusa- 
lem, Working in teams of six, the students 
"are at it from eight in the morning until 
nine at night, six days a week, officially. 
Then they often carry on until two in the 
morning when editing begins." 

"We want to stress video production 
for social purposes. We don't want to 
compete with TV." Getting that point 
across seems particularly difficult, hense 
the stress put on theoretical studies from 
the beginning of the course. Often tapes 
made by the center itself are sharply criti- 
cal of kibbutz life and the workshops en- 
courage the students in Video Shock to 
take a similar attitude. 

For the present, almost all video in kib- 
butzim is done by volunteers working in 
their spare time. "Few get days off to do 



video, but this is changing as the value of 
the work is becoming recognized," 

In teaching the ethics of video, the cen- 
ter encounters the different attitudes peo- 
ple have toward censorship in video as op- 
posed to print. Most kibbutzim have their 
own newsletters in which everyone is free 
to express his/her opinion without ques- 
tion, though the printing and distribution 
of the papers is sponsored by the central 
administration. It seems much harder to 
persuade administrations to take the same 
hands-off policy when video is involved, 
though some do. For example, most kib- 
butzim forbid personal attacks on their 
video circuits though these are routine in 
newsletters and are often relished by the 
readers. Yet, when compared to the con- 
straints of Israeli television's single 
government- dominated channel, kibbutz 
video is refreshingly free. 

"The video cassette libraries are Israel's 
second channel," said Carlos. "I think 
Israel has more cassette players per capita 
than any country in the world. People are 
demanding that the government give us a 
true second channel. When it comes I feel 
sure our kibbutz video movement will 
have a positive influence on its content 
and its outlook." 

George Stoney is a noted filmmaker and 
professor of film and video at New York 
University, 




Still photo from We Protest the War in Lebanon, in which protestors are restrained by police. 



18 Community Television Review 



The Use of Video in Ein Dor 

The following is excerpted from a letter 
dated July 1984 from Yenoshua Zamir. 
Zamir outlines two ways in which Ein Dor 
has recently used video creatively. 



An Experience Never To Be 
Forgotten 

On the 4th of July 1976, Jannet and 
Ezra were welcomed back home to Ein 
Dor after the worst week in their life . . . 
in Antebe. They tell us again what they 
went through, and many others tell the 
story of the day of return. Though our 
kibbutz is 36 years in Ein Dor, never was 
there a greater explosion of joy and tears. 
It was a welcome never to be forgotten, 
where the entire kibbutz did every possible 
thing to show their love for the young 
couple. This was documented at the time 
on 8 mm and still photos. 

On the 4th of July 1984, the video pro- 
gram was aired in Ein Dor and no one was 
seen on the sidewalks of the kibbutz. I can 
only speak for Rama (my wife) and myself. 
It was so exciting and moving that at times 
we couldn't see the TV because tears 
clouded our vision. 

Addressing Financial 
Difficulties 

We also used video as a part of the pro- 
cess to involve the community in solving 
our financial problems. 

The kibbutz was given a detailed report 
of the increasing financial difficulties. If 
we want to continue with our present stan- 
dard of living and continue to invest in 
building homes so we can absorb our chil- 
dren and others who wish to join us, we 
must find ways of increasing our income 
and/or cutting down on expenses. It is not 
simple to increase the income, because we 
are aging and our founding members are 
working less hours per day. 

On Saturday night, the general assem- 
bly, which meets every week and decides 
all major issues of kibbutz life, would try 
to deal with the problem. The video was 
used as follows: 

Friday morning, during breakfast time, 
a "sidewalk interview* ' was held right out- 
side the kibbutz dining hall. Members 
were asked: Are you aware of our present 
financial difficulties? What can be done 
to improve the situation? How can a maxi- 
mum number of people be brought to par- 



ticipate in the process — thinking, suggest- 
ing, and carrying out , . . ? 

On Saturday afternoon at 17:30 there 
was a live cablecast to all homes in the kib- 
butz. The following items were included 
in the program: 

# a short satire about the economic 
situation in the entire country; 

f a discussion from a panel of "ex- 
perts": the treasurer, secretary, factory 
manager, and farm manager from the kib- 
butz; 

i a call-in from members of the kib- 
butz; and 

# selections from answers to questions 
on the sidewalk interviews. 

The program was ended with: "We 
hope to see you all at the general meeting 
tonight at 21 :00." Not to lose our sense of 
proportion, the program was called "To 
Laugh or To Cry?" 

At the general meeting that night, more 
people came than usual. The participation 
was good and active. No decisions were 
taken. The search for solutions continues. 

The above two different forms of use of 
video in kibbutz are of course both 
"valid." The Antebe film was prepared in 
the course of a few weeks. The "eco- 



nomic" tape and panel was prepared in 
one day. There are many other uses of 
video for kibbutz community, as can be 
seen in the enclosed description of tapes 
prepared in the past in Ein Dor, However, 
considering the size of the community — 
450 members and total population of 750 
— it is impossible to build a regular daily 
or even weekly video program based on 
well prepared and edited programs. There 
simply will not be the people and time to 
do this regularly. However, the specific ex- 
ample of the above use of video as part of 
a general process of democratic involve- 
ment in issues of the kibbutz, is in my 
opinion the real chance of positive use of 
video in kibbutz. This requires light, non- 
expensive V% " equipment. Our editing is 
done with two Betamex, and is perfectly 
satisfactory. Every time, the perfectionists 
and professionals take over, and buy 3 A " 
equipment and an expensive editing sys- 
tem, less people participate because it 
is more cumbersome. In the end we have 
fewer video producers, and we lose our 
purpose: to use video as a democratizing 
agent. 

— Yehoshua Zamir 



NFLCP thanks the companies who provided 
financial support and free services to the 
National Convention 



American Television and Communications Corporation 
Daniels Associates Incorporated 
Group W Cable Incorporated 
Metrovision Cable 
United Cable Corporation 
BizNet, U.S. Chamber of Commerce 
The Learning Channel 
Mile Hi Cablevision 
United Cable of Colorado 




COMMUNITY 

MANAGING THE 




MANAGING THE HIDDEN RESOURCES 



National Federation of Local Cable Programmers 
1984 National Conference 

CASSETTE TAPES 




QUANTITY 

ACCESS MANAGEMENT 



. (1) Developing Access Funding and Managing Budget 

. (2) Access Management 

. (3) Volunteer and Intern Management 

, (5) Audience Development and Management 

, (6) Insurance Needs of the Access Operation 

. (7) Access Programming Formats and Technique 



QUANTITY 

ARTS ORGANIZATIONS AND ARTS INSTITUTIONS 

(33) Transforming a Stage Production to Video 

(34) Creative Formats for Arts Cable Programming 

(35) Developing Programming for Regional and National Distribution 

(37) Cable as an Audience Development Mechanism 

(38) What are the "Real" Quality Issues? 

(39) Plugging into Access on a Limited Budget 



LOCAL ORIGINATION AND ADVERTISING 

. (9) Local Origination and Access as a Cable Marketing Tool 

. (10) Local Origination Management 

.(11) Packaging and Promoting Local Programming 

. (13) Strategies for Local Revenue Development 

. (14) Raising Local Programming Quality 

. (15) Commercial Insertion Opportunities 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND CABLE COMMUNICATIONS 

. (17) Establishing, Managing and Programming Municipal Access Channels 

. (18) Assessing the Legal Risks of Local Cable Regulations 

. (19) Municipal Utilization of the Institutional Network 

. (21) Noxiprofit Access Corporations and Local Government 

. (22) Successful Municipal Programming: Formats and Techniques 

. (23) The Evolving Role of the Cable Administrator 

EDUCATORS AND LIBRARIANS IN CABLE 

. (25) Establishing and Managing the Educational Program Operation: K-12 

. (26) Libraries and Cable Communications 

. (27) Selecting and Developing Uses of the Institutional Network 

. (29) Kids and Cable 

. (30) Strategies for Involving Faculty in The New Technologies 



LABOR AND INDEPENDENT PRODUCERS 

. (40) Independent Producers and Their Relationship to Access Centers and Budgets 

. (41) Local Labor Access Programming 

. (42) New Initiatives and the Independent Producer 

.(43) Copy wright and Contract Issues of the Local Cable Producer 

.(45) Funding Sources for Access and Independent Producers 

.(46) National Labor Cable Programming 

. (47) Independents and Public Television 

ADVANCED ISSUES 

.(48) Commercial Leased Access: Its Role and Value 

. (49) Developing a Telecommunications Plan 

.(51) Community Programming and the Law 

,(53) Cable Industry Cutbacks and Restructuring: Case Studies 

. (54) Technical Issues of Interconnection 

. (55) Technicians Tips 

CABLE POLICY 

. (56) Primer of Cable Policy Issues 

.(57) Update on the Status of Federal Cable Legislation 

.(58) Cable's Competitors 

. (59) Renewal and Renegotiation of the Cable Franchise 
.(63) Whose First Amendment is it Anyway? 



. COLUME 1 TOTAL 



. COLUME 2 TOTAL 



Name. 



Date. 



Address. 
City 



_State_ 



_Zip_ 



Signature. 



1 tape @ $7.00 each 



2-5 tapes @ $6.00 each 



Phone ( 



)- 



□ Master Card □ VISA Exp. Date 
Card No. 



□ Check or Money Order 

6 or more tapes @ $5.00 each 



each - 



Total Number of Tapes Ordered 

(Includes Postage) 

Please allow 2-3 weeks processing & shipping 

ORDER FROM: Larry Anderson • 6862 South Lamar • Littleton, Colorado 80123 • (303) 972-0272 



Colorado Residents add 4.6% Tax . 

TOTAL PAID . 



20 Community Television Review 



Cable Comes to West Germany 



By Bettina Brandtner-Sego 



LUDWIGSHAFEN WEST GER- 
MANY — In this lower Rhine industrial 
city that serves as headquarters for one of 
the world's largest chemical concerns, the 
state government of Rhineland Palatinate 
has funded a pilot project that could 
change the broadcast system that has ex- 
isted here for over 30 years. At the site of 
a once prosperous stockyard complex, a 
modern, pristene, two-story brick-facade 
building, completed last July, houses this 
pilot project. The building bears the offi- 
cial sounding name — ANSTALT FUR 
KABLEKOMMUNIKATION (Institute 
for Cable Communication) or AKK as it is 
called here. To comprehend the impor- 
tance and the impact of the pilot project, 
one has to understand the existing broad- 
casting system in West Germany. 

Present Situation and 
Development 

There are presently two major networks 
(with the call letters ARD and ZDF) and 
three regional channels in west Germany. 
These broadcasting stations, in contrast to 
the privately owned and commercially 
printed press here, are organized as a 
public broadcasting system. They are fi- 
nanced through a state regulated fee paid 
to each television household. Additional 
revenue is generated by allowing a twenty- 
minute block of commercials in the early 
evening. 

To initiate the cable television system 
here, the prime ministers of the West Ger- 
man states (Lander) in May 1978 approved 
the concept of four cable television pilot 
projects in Ludwigshafen, Munich, Dort- 
mund and West Berlin. In November 1981 
it was decided that these four projects 
should be financed by increasing the tele- 
vision and radio fee 20 Pfenning (about 8 
cents) to DM16.25 (about $6,50) per 
month for each television household. This 
increase will generate a DM140 million 
fund to be distributed evenly among the 
four projects. In addition to establishing 
the funding, the state governors set up a 
commission to simultaneously study the 
effects of the cable television here on the 
printed media, on the existing TV and film 



industries, on the job market and on fam- 
ily life. 

The First Cable Project 

The forerunner among these four pilot 
projects is the AKK. Founded on June 15, 
1982, the AKK, unlike the other three 
projects is operating under a new state law 
which allows commercial companies to 
begin broadcasting through the AKK after 
obtaining the proper permit from state 
authorities. The AKK, under the direction 
of Claus Detjen, a journalist with 20 years 
of experience in the West German broad- 
cast media, has been commissioned to 
coordinate the programs, control the proj- 
ect and operate the transmission center in 
Ludwigshafen, 

The executive body of the AKK is the 
Assembly, consisting of 40 members and a 
three-member Executive Board, The As- 
sembly and its Board serve as honorary 
members and represent a cross section of 
the West German society. The Assembly's 
responsibility is to see that the legal re- 
quirements are followed and to grant 
licences for program applicants. The Ex- 
ecutive Board supervises the general man- 
ager, Mr. Detjen and his staff. 



The Technical Capacity 

The cable system of the Ludwigshafen 
project is designed to pass 150,000 house- 
holds by the end of 1985, mainly in the 
city of Ludwigshafen and several sur- 
rounding communities. The AKK will 
transmit its programs directly into the 
Ludwigshafen households via copper co- 
axial cable. To reach the surrounding 
communities in the project area, the pro- 
grams are sent via fiber optic cable to one 
of the main West German signal transmis- 
sion towers located across the Rhine in 
Mannheim. From there the signal is sent 
to the smaller receiving stations in the out- 
lying areas and then brought into the 
homes by copper coaxial cable. 



Subscriber Costs 

The West German Telecommunication 
Service (PTT) is placing the transmission 
cable in the test area and is installing a 
cable connection box in each house. How- 
ever, to receive the cable service, the 
homeowner needs to have a private con- 
tractor extend the cable from the connec- 
tion box to the television set which costs 
approximately DM300.00 (about $120.00) 




PTT van with the slogan: "Cable; More programs, better sound and picture. ** 



Community Television Review 21 




Also, a one-time connection fee of 
DM125,00 (about $50.00) must be paid to 
the PTT by the homeowner. The monthly 
fee is DM11.00 (about $4.50) of which 
DM6.00 goes to the PTT and DM5.00 to 
the AKK. (If a converter is needed in the 
case of an older non-cable-ready television 
set, the subscriber must pay an additional 
one time fee of DM200.00 (about $80.00) 
plus a monthly rental fee of DM2.00 
(about $0.80).) The minimum costs of 
West German cable television subscribers 
are DM425.00 connection fee and 
DM11.00 per month. 



Cable Programs 

A subscriber in the pilot project area 
will receive 19 television and 19 radio 
channels. This is expected to increase to 
24 television and 24 radio channels during 
the three-year test period for which the 
pilot project is funded. Of the 19 televi- 
sion channels, 11 are existing European 
programs including all national and re- 
gional German channels as well as the 
three French networks. The eight special 
channels include two commercially-spon- 
sored networks (with call letters EPF and 
PKS), the London-based SKY-TV (a 
movie channel in England transmitted via 
Satellite), a music channel, an educa- 
tional channel, a local access channel 
("Offener Kanal"— literally open chan- 
nel) and a community service channel 
("Cooperative Burgerservice" — citizens* 
service). The local access channel is pat- 
terned after the U.S. system and is 
completely new to the West German tele- 
vision audience. The "Offener Kanal" 
enables every resident to produce and air 
his production at no cost, The community 
service channel "Cooperative Burgerser- 
vice" makes it possible for organizations 
to produce and air programs on a regular 
basis for a small fee. The EPF ("Erste Pri- 
vate Fernsehgesellschaft" or first private 

television company) and the PKS (Pro- 
grammgesellschaft fur Kable — und Satel- 
htenrundfunk" or company for cable — 
and satellite television) are also unique in 
the West German market in that they are 



totally funded by private investment, and 
will generate revenues through the sale of 
commercial time. Present government re- 
strictions permit a maximum 12 minutes 
of commercial time for each 60 minutes of 
programming, and the commercials may 
not interrupt tfie program, itself. 

SKY-TV in London will broadcast its 
programs through the AKK via the recent- 
ly launched European Communication 
Satellite (ECS 1). The satellite is a jointly 
funded effort of the European Communi- 
ty Postal Services of which the PTT is a 
part. The PTT has leased 2 channels on 
ECS 1 for broadcast of both the public 



network and private commercial pro- 
grams. 

The first successful test broadcast from 
London to the Ludwigshafen area via 
ECS 1 was completed in December. The 
project in Ludwigshafen serves as a pilot 
for the future development of German 
satellite television programs. Beginning in 
January, tests will take place for expanding 
German satellite television via the ECS. A 
syndicate of private German program- 
mers, among which PKS plays a leading 
role, is presently being formed. Next to the 
AKK in Ludwigshafen an up-link-station 
will be built. 



QlMep.wfi'c new 



© 1984 by Nicole Hollander 



WOMEN'S VOICES: THE GENDER GAP MOVIE (16 min., color) features 
interviews with 15 everyday women, up-to-date information about the 
gender gap, and Nicole Hollander's cartoon character SYLVIA in her 
movie debut. 

• Perfect for broadcast in the fail election season! 

• Available in 16mm film and all video formats. 



Contact: Gender Gap Film Corp. • 1901 W. Wellington 
Chicago, IL 60657 • (312) 4724366 



22 Community Television Review 




Technical Facilities at the AKK 

While the AKK is not permitted to pro- 
duce it's own programs, it supplies other 
programmers, primarily participants of 
the local access and community service 
channels, with a fully equipped television 
studio, remote video equipment, editing 
facilities, three broadcasting studios and 
facilities to air incoming productions in all 
formats. 



Financial Aspects of the 
Pilot Project 

Since December 1982, approximately 
DM10 million has been spent for building 
the AKK operation center in Ludwig- 
shafen, and an additional DM13.5 million 
for the technical equipment at the center. 
The PTT is expected to spend DM100 mil- 
lion for cabling the pilot project area. 

For the three-year test period, the AKK 
like the other three pilot projects has a 
DM35 million budget from the television 
fee. To generate additional revenue, the 
AKK is permitted to take a 10% share of 
the total advertising revenue of each of 
the programmers in the cable system and 
charge for the use of its technical facili- 
ties. However, the AKK intends to wait 
with these fees until a minimum of 25,000 
subscribers have been obtained and the 
potential for at least 100,000 subscribers 
exist. 



Prospects for the Future 

The immediate benefits of cable televi- 
sion to the West German system are ob- 
vious: improved reception, a greater num- 
ber of channels and a public awareness 
and participation in media. If the four 
pilot projects are a success, and cable tele- 
vision is accepted by the public and the 
European satellite broadcasting system is 
expanded, West Germany hopes to be at 
the forefront of the communication 
revolution. 

Bettina Brandtner-Sego is with the AKK's 
Information Center in Ludwigshafen. 



LOW LUX CAMERAS NEED LIGHT 

DISADVANTAGES OF SHOOTING WITHOUT A VIDEO LIGHT 
CEVEN WITH 3 LUX CAMERAS!) 



~t .GRAINY IMAGES. SHOOTING IN LOW LIGHT REQUIRES TURNING OP THE GAIN CONTROL (DON E AUTOMATI- 
CALLY ON MOST CONSUMER CAMERAS MANUALLY ON INDUSTRIAL MODELS-! WHICH SUBSTANTIALLY RAISES THE 
"NOISE" LEVEL AND CAUSES GRAINIER IMAGES. THE CAMERA'S ELECTRONICS FUNCTION BEST Wl I HZtKU Ub GAIN 

E. REDUCED DEPTH-OF FIELD. TO COMPENSATE FOR LOW LIGHT, THE CAMERA'S DIAPHRAGM MUST BE 
OPENED WIDER [DONE AUTOMATICALLY IN MANY CAMERAS), WHICH GREATLY REDUCES DEPTH-OF-FIELD fZONE 
OF SHARPNESS) IN THE PICTURE. 

3. REDUCED IMAGE CONTRAST. VIDEO IMAGES SUFFER GREATLY REDUCED CONTRAST IN LOW LIGHT 
LEVELS - MUCH MORE THAN DO FILM IMAGES IN IDENTICAL SITUATIONS. 

4. POOR SKIN TONES. IN LOW LIGHT. IT IS DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE TO "WHITE BALANCE" THE CAMERA, 
ANO THIS LACK OF BALANCE ESPECIALLY DEGRADES SKIN TONES (CAUSING GREENISH OR BLUISH FACES) 



1 3 REASONS TO BUY THE CbQL-LUX 1 " MINI-COOL" VIDEO LIGHT 



1 ■ SELECTED BY NASA FOR USE ABOARD THE 5 P AC E SHUTTLES, AFTER 
EXTENSIVE TESTING OF MANY COMPETITIVE LIGHTS. 

2. HIGH LIGHT OUTPUT. MORE LIGHT FROM ^50 WATTS THAN OTHERS PRODUCE FROM 600 WATTS. 

3. WEIGHT. A MERE TWELVE OUNCES. 

4. TEFLON COATED. COMPLETELY COATED INSIDE AND OUT WITH CERTIFIED DUPDNT TEFl 0M"S" TEFLON IS 
MORE DURABLE THAN PAINT AND IS ELECTRICALLY NON-CONDUCTIVE. EVEN RESISTS SALT WATER CORROSION. 

5. ALUMINUM ALLO Y CONSTRUCTION, MADE ALMOST ENTIRELY OF AIRCRAFT-GRADE ALUMINUM 
ALLOY. LIGHT ANO STRONG. 

6. SAFETY SHEILO. BUILT-IN TEMPE RED-GLASS SHIELD PROTECTS LAMP FROM FOREIGN OBJECTS DR 
SPLASHED LIQUIDS, AND PROTECTS OPERATOR FROM POSSIBLE LAMP EXPLOSION. 

7. DUAL INTERNAL FILTER SLOTS. DUAL SLOTS ALLOW SIMULTANEOUS USAGE OF UA YLIGHT FILTER 
AND DIFFUSION LENS (BOTH AVAILABLE AS ACCESSORIES). 

B. HIGH-TEMPERATURE RESISTANT WIRING. BEST-PROTECTED WIRING OF ANY VIDEO LIGHT ON 
THE MARKET ALL INTERNAL WIRING IS ENCLOSED IN CUSTOM-MADE SILICONE SLEEVE. POWER CORD IS HEAVY- 
DUTY. 16 GAUGE. 3-WIRE GROUNDED CONSTRUCTION. 

S.AC/OC OPERATION. MUlTI -PURPOSE FIXTURE OPERATES FROM AC OR DC. SIMPLY BY INSTALLING AN 
AC OR DC LAMP AND THE APPROPRIATE CONNECTING CORD. 

I WIDE VARIETY OF LAMPS AVAILABLE. 1 1 lamps 
AVAILABLE IN VOLTAGES OF -15, 14.4. 3D on 1 SO 
VOLTS, SPOTS OR FLOODS. 25 TO S50 WATTS. 

1 1 .HEAT-FREE LIGHT BEAM. SO COOL YOU CAN CLIP COLORED 
GELS TO THE BARN DOORS, AND THE GELS WON'T MELT OR IGNITE DON'T 
TRY THIS WITH OTHER VIDEO LIGHTS 1 

1 2. MANY ACCESSORIES AVAILABLE. MOUNTING DEVICES 
FDR EVERY SITUATION, ADAPTER CORDS FOR EVERY POWER SUPPLY, 
BATTERY PACKS AND BELTS, DIFFUSION LENS. DAYLIGHT FILTER, 
PHOTO DIMMER, BARN DOORS AND MORE. 

1 3- GET A S5.DD GIFT CERTIFICATE —AND A 1 6 PAGE 
FULL COLOR LIGHTING GUIDE BY SENDING $3.50 
To. . .' 

MINI-COOL"" MOUNTED ON 16MM CAMERA 
SPECIALLY-DESIGNED BY AJASA FOR USE 0Y 
ASTRONAUTS ON SPACE SHUTTLE FLIGHTS 

ACCEPT IMO SUBSTITUTES 




CbQL-LUX 



5723 AUCKLAND AVE 
N. HOLLYWOOD, DA 31 6Q1-92Q7 
[818] 7B1-B1B1 



Community Television Review 23 



"Offener Kanal": An Access Experiment 



By Christa Hategan 

A special feature of the experimental 
system in Ludwigshafen is the 4 'Offener 
Kanal" or Open Channel, Open Channel is 
modeled after public access in the United 
States, and has a professionally equipped 
studio facility with six full-time staff. 

There has been a tremendous response 
to Open Channel. During its first three 
months of operation there were 72 pro- 
grams lasting 55 hours (about four and 
one-half hours a week). 

The nature of the programming would 
be familiar to any student of public access 
in the United States. A doctor produced a 
documentary on the work in an emergency 
ward; a fire fighter produced a videotape 
on his work shift; and a butcher developed 
a program on body building. Music and 
dance are favorite topics. In addition, 
peace groups, university groups, and reli- 
gious organizations frequently use the 
channel. 



However, scheduling has been a big 
problem. The legislation that created 
Open Channel stipulates that producers 
can reserve only one block of time on a 
strict first-come, first served basis, and 
cannot reserve more time until after the 
date of the initial cablecast. For example, 
if a producer plans a three-part series to 
be cablecast every Thursday between 7:00 
and 8:00 p.m., that producer may be able 
to obtain time the first Thursday, but it is 
unlikely there will be time available for the 
second Thursday evening (since he or she 
must wait until after the first installment 
to reserve time for the second installment). 
Consequently there are no regular pro- 
grams, and Open Channel is unable to 
cultivate an audience. 

Ironically, there is a lot of dead air 
time, because the tremendous demand is 
for fairly concentrated time slots. The 
studio is open between 9:00 a.m. and 1 1 



p.m., and anyone can go on the system 
during these times if space is available. On 
some days the channel is empty all day, 
but there is usually a crowd on weekends. 

Ludwigshafen also has a special channel 
for citizens organizations, and this con- 
sortium is operating smoothly, "Coopera- 
tive Burgerservice" or Citizens Service is 
run by about 20 institutions: chruches, 
schools, health organizations, and public 
interest groups. They rent the professional 
studio for roughly $25 per hour and con- 
tribute a structured program seven days a 
week. They cablecast their material from 
4:30 to 6:30 p.m., and repeat the pro- 
grams the next morning. The content re- 
sembles public service announcements 
that are aired in the United States. 



Christa Hategan is from Hamburg, West 
Germany. 




MUNICIPAL PROGRAMMING SHOWCASE 



The NFLCP now presents a 30 minute sampler tape of some of the 
best municipal programming available. Programs covering different 
topics and formats from all across the country are featured. If you wish 
to buy or rent this tape, please fill out this form. 

LJ Yes, I want to buy "Municipal Programming Showcase." Enclosed 
please find a check for $100. 



Yes, I want to rent "Municipal Programming Showcase." Enclosed 
please find a check for $40 to cover the price of a 7 day rental. 



Organization 
City 



Zip Code 



Telephone 



Make check payable to NFLCP 



JIMMY REA 




Understands Your Mobile Unit Needs for That New Franchise. 

High Quality Production, Large Impressive Appearance, Price! 
Our Solution; 1 Chevrolet 14' Cube Van Including; 



• Delivery in 30 days. 



OwSr CAS Storage 






^ SlitJmg Ooori 




VCR 














Ooor 


















Gen 










AuO>0 








I J — | 














Slonge 
























Camera & AC 






Cit) 

'-- - - ^ . . ft< 


■i- ■'. .• _____ — - 



Having built trucks for many 
needs, we can provide a 
tremendous amount of infor- 
mation on mobile production 
studio design, construction 
and maintenance. 

All of our truck quotations 
include delivery with full 
instructions to operating 
personnel. 

Representing over 300 lines 
of video hardware, we are 
available to discuss substi- 
tutions to our recommenda- 
tions in every area from 
cameras to truck chassis. 



Sony and Panasonic 
production packages installed 
in our high cube unit 
complete: 

$49,900.00 



WE ALSO CUSTOM BUILD! ! ! 

All You Provide is: 

• Description of your individual needs 

• Budget limitation 

We Provide internally: 

• Technical work and engineering 

• Carpentry and materials 

• Complete installation consisting of 
high quality custom construction 
satisfying all your personal needs. 





Our sales representatives will be very happy to call on your office with complete 
blueprints,©! the trucks described in our offer. Your individual needs can then be 
fully discussed and if changes are required, pricing affected by those require- 
ments can be completely discussed. 



Call or Write for our Free Truck Information Package: ■ 



540 West Broad Street 
Columbus, Ohio 43215 
(614) 221-5170 



JIMMY REA 



Community Television Review 25 



International Telecommunications and 
Information Policy 



By Helen Weiss 

(Edited by Christopher Sterling; Commu- 
nications Press, Inc., Washington, B.C. 
1984) 

Communications Press, Inc., recently 
released a hefty two-part book that 
includes proceedings from a 1983 sympo- 
sium on policy options currently being 
explored by the United States in interna- 
tional telecommunications and informa- 
tion. The symposium was based on a 
report issued several months earlier by the 
National Telecommunications and Infor- 
mation Administration (NTIA). That 
government report, which addresses the 
long-range goals in this field, comprises 
the second half of the International Tele- 
communications and Information Policy 
publication. 

Except for students of public policy, 
this book will probably be useful to cable 
access professionals only for reference 
purposes. The bulk of the presentations at 
the George Washington University sym- 
posium, deal with the policy options for 
telecommunications in the field's broadest 
context— in terms of the past and of future 
prospects for telegraph, telephones, radio, 
television and direct broadcast satellite. 
Within this broad framework, two major 
sets of options emerge: those of the U.S. 
telecommunications industry heavily in- 
fluenced by the private sector, and those 
available to most other countries, both 
"developed" and "developing" nations 
where telecommunications are by in large 
determined by their governments. 

Christopher Sterling, who edited this 
publication and is the Director of the 
George Washington University Center for 
Telecommunications Studies, co-authored 
the introduction with FCC attorney 
Stephen Thompson. They explain that in- 
ternational telecommunications and in- 
formation is important to the U.S. in 
three ways which include: a marketplace 
for U.S. service providers projected to be 
a world market of $85 billion by 1987; a 
U.S. service-oriented economy in which 
many banking and financial institutions 
are becoming increasingly dependent on 
rapid information; and finally, cultivation 
of an effective international network to 
increase access to education, public health 



and safety while creating safeguards for 
national security. These reasons explain 
how and why the U.S. private sector 
equates "free flow of information" with 
the desire of U.S. businesses to protect 
this country's long-range economic in- 
terests. 

However, the United States, while it has 
wielded considerable influence in the de- 
velopment of telecommunications world- 
wide, has remained relatively alone in 
pushing the concepts of competition and 
deregulation in this field. The majority of 
countries still seem to prefer a single 
government-controlled monopoly as the 
conduit for telecommunications services 
and rates. According to Sterling and 
Thompson, most countries do not typical- 
ly have a "competitive environment." All 
services are provided as "public services" 
with the revenues generally applied to re- 
couping investments on telecommunica- 
tions facilities and subsidizing other pub- 
lic services, in particular the postal 
systems. 

For this reason, there is an obvious con- 
flict between these two philosophies in 
areas such as exporting and importing of 
television programming. In the eyes of 
some U.S. policymakers, countries which 
are potential buyers of programming pro- 
duced in the U.S. have not only set up 
economic barriers, but also "noneconomic 
barriers" in the name of national sover- 
eignty and cultural autonomy, especially 
in the areas of television and radio. One 
example is Canada where there is concern 
about processing data abroad because of 
possible political sabotage. There are also 
worries about direct broadcast satellite 
(DBS), which can reach any audience 
without intermediaries. While some of the 
symposium presenters addressed the issue 
of cultural autonomy for the lesser "de- 
veloped" countries, others pointed to The 
Clyne Report in which there are concerns 
about the problems Canadian children 
have in identifying political leaders, public 
figures and folk heroes. 

The NTIA report further details the 
fear which a number of nations have ex- 
pressed about DBS "seriously affecting a 
nation's autonomy to choose its own form 



of television, and the "spillover effect" 
that seems to reflect the nature of tele- 
vision." The NTIA document further 
notes that "governments recognize that 
television is the most powerful mass 
medium created by man" and that each 
nation, including the United States, should 
determine for itself the "essential charac- 
ter of the national television system." 

In short, DBS is looked to in the eco- 
nomically "developing" countries as the 
most practical technology (especially for 
nations with a single language and a com- 
mon culture) to establish regional net- 
works. However, the NTIA report con- 
cludes that direct satellite broadcasting 
across borders may pose a threat to the in- 
terest of nations and their ability to deter- 
mine there own television destiny. 

On the other hand, the report recog- 
nizes that especially for developing na- 
tions with minimum terrestrial facilities 
for national broadcasting and only one or 
two stations limited to larger cities, DBS 
could be used "to educate, disseminate in- 
formation for the improvement of health 
and economic well-being." 

According to the NTIA report, the 
Soviet Union initially (and later Sweden 
and Canada) struggled for more than a 
decade to develop an international policy 
that addresses these concerns. It is now 
expected that within the next several years, 
DBS may be used widely to provide tele- 
vision services to remote areas with bad 
reception. The technology will also be 
utilized to add new channel capacity to the 
existing national systems and to "spur 
on" international trade and industrial 
development. 

Amid all this concern about the danger 
and the potentials of DBS, one wonders 
when local programming and public ac- 
cess will be addressed by international 
policymakers. 



Helen Weiss is Executive Director of 
Marin Community Video in California. 



26 Community Television Review 



Optimism Reigns at NFLCP Convention in Denver 



By Paul D'Ari 

"Community Programming: Managing the 
Hidden Resources ," NFLCP's seventh annual 
Convention held in mid-July in Denver, 
demonstrated once again that community 
television is a continually growing institution 
throughout the United States. The 725 people 
attending the three-day session made it the 
largest NFLCP Convention ever. This 40 per- 
cent increase in attendance from last year 
solidified the legitimacy and strength of 
NFLCP and the community programming 
movement. 

Those attending were representatives from 
access centers, local origination operations, 
local governments, schools, libraries, unions, 
churches, and other organizations. The nature 
of the audience reaffirmed the notion that 
community programming has now come of 
age. While the earliest NFLCP conventions 
were dominated by access advocates with 
limited influence, the most recent conventions 
have been well attended by government of- 
ficials, industry insiders and establishment 
organizations with much more clout. 

Perhaps the greatest indication of communi- 
ty television's recent growth is the quality of 
programs being produced on the local level. 
At the Convention's Awards Banquet, NFLCP 
recognized the winners of the Hometown USA 
Video Festival, Excerpts from all award win- 
ning programs were shown at the banquet, and 
it was evident from these short sequences that 
the quality of community programming has 
improved dramatically. 

In fact, several large commercial ventures 
are seeking community programming to in- 
clude in their service packages. For example, 
the Home Theater Network (with over 250,000 
subscribers) will include excerpts from a 
number of Hometown USA winners. They will 
appear on the weekly program, "Traveling 
America:' Nickolodeon (over 12,000,000 
subscribers) is also seriously considering ex- 
cerpts from six of the Hometown USA win- 
ners. Another outlet for outstanding 
Hometown USA programs is the Community 
Programming Network (CPN) created by 
American Television and Communications 
Corporation (ATC). CPN is carried on a 
number of ATC systems and reaches 800,000 
subscribers. Final Iv, the Learning Channel 
(formerly the Appelachian Community Ser- 
vice Network) has a well endowed project to 



showcase the works of independent producers, 
and is also interested in Hometown USA award 
winners. 

There was other evidence at the Convention 
that community programming has obtained 
greater legitimacy. Dick Holcombe, Vice 
President of ATC, told convention participants 
that "community programming is cable's 
secret weapon. . . Community programming is 
a marketing tool; it is a public relations tool; 
and it is also a refranchising tool. Nothing can 
demonstrate a cable operator's concern for a 
community better than community program- 
ming can." 

Similar sentiments were expressed by Victor 
Livingstone, Editor in Chief of CableVision 
Magazine. Livingstone indicated that com- 
munity programming is an essential cable 
service. 

"I can live without HBO because I can rent 
movies. And my kids can live without MTV 
although they enjoy it. However, community 
programming is much more important. 

"Cable operators need you. You are a 
political necessity for them... You are to cable 



operators what kissing babies are to politi- 
cians." 

In spite of the rise in stature of community 
programming in recent years, there was some 
concern at the Convention for the survival of 
community programming. This year's Con- 
vention was held in the midst of attacks on 
community prograrnming from all sides. 
There were discussions on industry cut-backs, 
which are threatening local origination and ac- 
cess programming all across the country, par- 
ticularly in the recently franchised large ur- 
ban areas. There was even more concern for 
the FCC's reinforcement of these cut-backs in 
the Miami Decision and the FCC's Public 
Notice of March 7, 1984. In light of the cur- 
rent predisposition of the FCC, the recent deci- 
sion by the U.S. Supreme Court in Crisp 
(which may give the FCC wider authority to 
preempt local governments in cable regula- 
tion) also received considerable attention at 
the three day gathering. Finally, there was a 
serious concern over Congressional legislation 
which is threatening the foundation of funding 
for public access. 




The teleconference on the second day of the convention featured proponents of community 
programming in Denver and representatives from the FCC and NCTA in Washington, DC 



Community Television Review 27 



rOMMUNIT Y PROGRA MMING 

VV C MA [N AG I N G THE HIDDEN RESOURC 1 5 ) 



Industry Cutbacks 

The widespread industry cutbacks on com- 
munity programming was a major concern at 
the convention. Many participants were from 
Dallas, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, New Orleans, 
Omaha, Atlanta, Miami, and other cities 
where community programming is being 
threatened. 

In his keynote address Steve Suitts told the 
gathering of community programmers that 
public access and local origination program- 
ming are in trouble. 

"Whenever the economy worsens and in- 
terest rates are high, cable owners begin to cut 
corners and usually begin by proposing to 
reduce or eliminate local programming. The 
reason they start there is simple: cable owners 
view public access and often local origination 
as major expenses that generate little or no 
revenue/' 

"These cycles are for public access the 
cycles of poverty. With each cycle local pro- 
gramming in cable is substantially injured and 
is less able in the future to realize its oppor- 
tunities and promise to the communities. In- 
deed, I cannot think of a single example when 
an initial substantial commitment to public ac- 
cess was reduced for economic reasons but in 
better economic conditions was restored to its 
original commitment. Once it is lost, it is lost 
for all time to come." 

"[W]e are in the depths of another 
crisis... [and] most of the best moments for 
public access have now passed.'* 

The community programming cutbacks 
were also the topic of discussion during the 
teleconference between community program- 
ming proponents at the convention in Denver, 
ant NCTA and FCC officials in Washington, 
DC. The teleconference addressed the ques- 
tion, "Will the Marketplace Deliver Com- 
munity Programming?*' A hypothetical case 
study was presented in which a cable operator 
that promised substantial innovative services, 
later approached the city for major system cut- 
backs, including significant reductions in sup- 
port for community programming. 

Char Beales, NCTA Vice President for Pro- 
gramming and Marketing, defended the 
operator's cutbacks. "The cable operator is in 
business and makes his business by pleasing 
his subscribers. If there are people who want 



the service, the cable operator will be more 
than happy to provide it. I go back to the fun- 
damental question though: do you provide 
more than most people actually want? The 
cable operator is in the business of bringing 
out what his subscribers want and fulfilling 
that need. In this case they don't really want 
all channels... so the operator is cutting 
back... If there is a demand for more chan- 
nels later, then a good businessman would pro- 
vide more channels, if that's what the 
subscribers really want." 

"There are a number of things that bother 
me," responded Frank Spiller, President of 
Francis Spiller Associates, "when I hear this 
notion that community programming is a ser- 
vice that not many people want. The fact is 
we are dealing with a whole new kind of televi- 
sion. Yet, the tendency is always to evaluate 
it by the rules of conventional broadcast televi- 
sion. We have to break this cycle somehow and 
get on to the business of using this great com- 
munications opportunity for the benefit of 
communities.*' 

Sue Miller Buske, Executive Director of 
NFLCP, argued that cutbacks of community 
programming are coming before the medium 
has had a chance to develop. "It typically takes 
3 to 4 years for community programming to 
mature. What we are seeing around the coun- 
try is that one year or one and a half years 
into the operation of local programming, there 
will be a request for a major cutback. The 



operator will say there are not enough people 
using the equipment and the channel is not ac- 
tive enough. 

"One of the things I find interesting is this: 
will the marketplace deliver anything if peo- 
ple don't know it exists?. . . You have to educate 
the public and that is not a process that takes 
two weeks, two months, or two years. It is a 
long term process... and it is not that much 
different than developing and marketing any 
other new product." 

Access Payments and Franchise 
Fees 

The convention was in an uproar over the 
FCC*s recent support of industry cutbacks by 
pre-empting local governments in a number 
of cases, particularly in the decision on 
Miami, Florida's petition for a waiver of the 
3 percent franchise fee limitation. In that case 
the FCC staff granted the waiver but ruled that 
access payments offered by TCI must be con- 
sidered part of the franchise fee. The Com- 
mission reasoned that access payments fun- 
nel ed through Miami Cable Access Corpora- 
tion only benefit one group of special users 
— access users. Unless access payments are 
completely voluntary and benefit all users in- 
cluding the cable operator, these payments 
must be considered a part of the franchise fee, 
the FCC said. 

This relationship between access payments 
and franchise fees was also one of the major 




Dick Holcombe, a Vice President with ATC } speaks at a workshop on "The Future of Com- 
munity Programming" 



28 Community Television Review 



fOMMUNITY PROGRAMMING 

V %F( MANAGING THE HID DEM HE SOURCES 



topics of discussion during the teleconference. 

James McKinney, Chief of the FCCs Mass 
Media Bureau, told NFLCP Convention par- 
ticipants that he didn't 4 'see any bright rain- 
bow on the horizon for local access where the 
government is requiring it." McKinney in- 
dicated that access payments offered by the 
cable company during the competitive bidding 
process will be taken out of the franchise fee 
unless the 4 'offer is free and voluntary; that 
is, there are no threats by the city government 
— [i.e.] — 'if you don't offer it, you're not 
going to get the franchise' or 'if you don't of- 
fer it, you're not going to get your franchise 
renewed: 

4 'We do not see a distinction between the 
RFP and the franchise. When you request a 
waiver of 3 percent franchise fee limitation, 
we don't concern ourselves with the difference 
between the request for proposals and the fran- 
chise agreement," 

Many convention participants believed this 
reasoning ran contrary to the concept of corn- 
petitivie bidding. Mary Sue Smoller, Assis- 
tant to the City Manager from Miami, Florida, 
argued that the Miami decision is unfair to 
consumers. "We went through a long and ar- 
duous competitive process to find a franchisee 
that would best meet the need of our citizens. 
A key element in selecting a particular cable 
operator is its commitment to providing com- 
munity prograrnming diversity. The franchisee 
is expected to meet its commitments and cities 
have an obligation to preserve lawful 
agreements to the maximum extent possible." 

New York University Professor George 
Stoney suggested the FCC's approach is com- 
pletely unfair to the losers in a competitive bid- 
ding process. "[Let's imagine] I was an ap- 
plicant for the franchise and based my applica- 
tion on a realistic analysis of the market, rather 
than all the malarky the company that won us- 
ed. My bid was more conservative, and I lost 
out. Now the winning company [with FCC ap- 
proval] is rolling it al] back. 

"Why shouldn't the city be able to start all 
over and renegotiate will all of us? Don't I have 
rights as well?" 

Developing a New Consensus 

In suggesting how community programmers 
can respond to these threats, Steve Suitts stated 
that the movement must find ways to develop 
"a lasting political consensus for public ac- 



cess." He suggested that the basis for a political 
consensus that can maintain access is to build 
alliances with organizations with broad con- 
stituencies. 4 'In most places, especially in ur- 
ban areas, when you begin to recognize the 
full range of these groups — people of color, 
ethnic groups, the poor, civil rights advocates, 
civil libertarians, labor unionists, feminists, 
the elderly, peace advocates, environmen- 
talists, children, advocates for honest govern- 
ment, alternative artists, the physically disabl- 
ed — these numbers add up to a very substan- 
tial and powerful group who are the natural 
constituencies to maintain a political concen- 
sus for public access and to build a substan- 
tial, impressive audience for local programs" 

A Sense of Optimism 

In spite of the deep concern over the serious 
attacks on community prograrnming, the con- 
vention was not in a panic. Community pro- 
grarnming has survived throughout the United 
States in the worst of times, and there was an 
unspoken feeling at the Convention that it 
would continue to do so. Most participants 
came to the Convention to concentrate on the 
nuts and bolts of community programming and 
they had plenty of opportunity to pursue their 
purpose. 

The 66 workshops focused on important 
practical considerations that local program- 
mers face on a daily basis. These workshops 
were broken up into nine tracks: Access 
Management, Local Origination and 
Advertising, Local Government and Cable 
Communications, Educators and 
Librarians in Cable, Arts Organizations 
and Arts Institutions, Labor and Indepen- 
dent Producers, Advanced Issues, Cable 
Policy, and Programming Showcase. 

The emphasis in these workshops was not 
so much on how to survive, but on how to 
grow and improve community service. There 
was a clear sense of optimism in Denver. After 
all, community programming has made 
historic gains in recent years and has already 
become an important tradition in many areas 
of the United States. Congress, the FCC and 
the U.S. Supreme Court may slow the move- 
ment down, but there is no doubt now that ac- 
cess and local origination programming will 
blossom for many years to come. 

Paul DAri is Managing Editor of the Com- 
munity Television Review, 



7 i 



NC. 



633 South Federal Boulevard 
Denver, Colorado 80219 



1-800-525-9571 
1-303-922-5564 



Call us for friendly 
pricing on systems 
or on components, 



WE 
PROUDLY 
REPRESENT: 



3M 

Panasonic 

JVC 



Community Television Review 29 



Convention 
Feedback 



The National Convention in Denver 
was a tremendous success this year, and 
it would not have been possible without 
the efforts of Professional Meeting 
Management and many volunteers who 
put in long hours. The national office 
received numerous letters and phone calls 
praising the quality of the Convention. 
Herewith is a small sample: 



D ear NFLCP: 

your of- 

s r ssfoj ^; i r o]vedon -e 0 , 

* ein g a new mmu 
w >Kn the NFLCP f ^ m ° re a <*ve 

hammers. ° f UcaJ C ab j e 
Sincerely, 

f^t. Scott 

S P™g, Texas 



Dear NFLCP: 

I just returned from Denver and 
wanted you to know that I had a great 
time at the conference and was very 
impressed by what I heard and those 
I met. My compliments for all your 
hard work. 

Sincerely, 

Susan Murphy 

Educational Consultant 
Rogers Cablesystems 
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 



Dear NFLCP; 

In all my years (and careers- 
communiry organizing, law, teaching, 
health planning) that was without a 
doubt t he best conference lever at- 
tended! Really! 

Kind Regards, 

Henry L. Freund 

Office of Human Resources 

City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii 



Dear NFLCP". 

and 1 want to congi« 
job well done. 

Sincerely, 

Nanette Kainone 

Office of the Preset 

Borough of Brooklyn, NY 





FALCON 

CABLE TV 



Congratulates 
Our Staff Producers 



Ron Hudson 
Asian Cultural Festival 

Narrowcast Category 
& 

Anna Marie Piersimoni 
Vertical Interval 

Arts & Cultural Expression 
Category 



1984 



HOMETOWN USA 



VIDEO FESTIVAL 



WINNERS 




30 Community Television Review 



Cable Access As A Community Asset 

By Steve Suitts 



The following is an excerpted text of the 
key-note address delivered at the NFL CP 
National Convention by Steve Suitts, Ex- 
ecutive Director of the Southern Regional 
Council. 

Public access on cable television, in my 
judgment, is the most important techno- 
logical advancement of the concept of free 
speech in this century. The notion that 
people are given without charge the op- 
portunity to train and prepare, as they 
wish, video programming which is distrib- 
uted free throughout a cable system to 
thousands of households has no parallel 
in any other means of mass communica- 
tions. Cable access provides in our society 
today what the soap box on the town 
square did in the America of small towns a 
century ago. 

Despite this unique central role for 
cable access, the concept has seldom been 
protected as a matter of law by the state or 
federal courts. The First Amendment has 
seldom been interpreted by the federal 
courts as requiring cable access to exist in 
any community or to be preserved when 
threatened. In fact, court decisions in the 
last few years suggest that the right of ac- 
cess will be no more protected by the 
courts in the future than it has been in the 
past. 

Without the protection of the First 
Amendment by the courts, the concept of 
cable access depends solely upon political 
and economic decisions that are primarily 
on the local and national levels. Unlike 
the right of citizens to parade down main 
street, the right of citizens to send video 
programming downstream is only as good 
as the political concensus and the eco- 
nomic realities permit. 

The Cycles of Poverty 

This fact of life has come home to a 
good number of communities in the last 
several months as cable companies have 
proposed to reduce substantially their 
commitments of resources to local pro- 
gramming. The good folks of Milwaukee, 
Dallas, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, and elsewhere 
know this fact of life only too well. 



The best moments for cable access are 
its first moments. When franchising oc- 
curs, public access is usually in its best 
posture. Hard times for public access run 
in cycles. Whenever the economy worsens 
and interest rates are high, cable owners 
begin to cut corners and usually begin by 
proposing to reduce or eliminate local 
programming. The reason they start there 
is simple: cable owners view public access 
and often local origination as major ex- 
penses that generate little or no revenue. 

The results are often equally as straight 
forward: At some time or another, when 
the political support for local program- 
ming weakens, the economic needs of the 
company causes a reduction in local 
access. 

These cycles are for public access the 
cycles of poverty. With each cycle local 
programming on cable is substantially in- 
jured and is less able in the future to 
realize its opportunities and promise to 
the communities. Indeed, I cannot think 
of a single example when an initial sub- 
stantial commitment to public access was 
reduced for economic reasons, but in bet- 
ter economic conditions was restored to 
its original commitment. Once it is lost, it 
is lost for all time to come. 

Because we are in the depths of another 
cycle, and because most of the franchising 
is over — most of the best moments for 
public access— have passed. We must 
search hard for better ways to protect the 
concept and to improve upon the reality 
of community programming on local ac- 
cess channels, We must do so in ways that 
we have hesitated to embrace in the past. 
We must do so by making public access 
and local programming as much of an 
asset as an obligation of the community 
and the cable company. 

Developing Constituencies 

I believe that we who use and operate 
public access must become the evangelists 
who enlist people to realize the great 
promise and opportunities of local pro- 
gramming in cable. And, I believe we 
must find ways to hold a lasting political 
concensus for public access and to answer 



the economic arguments which threaten 
its survival. 

I know that almost every local access 
operation provides some very good pro- 
gramming and can provide an impressive 
listing of organizations with which it has 
worked. Yet, I also know that the pro- 
gramming of public access today is carried 
out largely without the genuine, continu- 
ing and daily support and involvement of 
community groups. We can no longer af- 
ford to have the primary, ongoing in- 
volvement of such groups only on occa- 
sion or only on paper. 

The organizations with constituencies 
in your community are the essential basis 
for a political concensus that can maintain 
public access. Their political support, 
however, will not come nor will it con- 
tinue unless community organizations are 
involved in a vital way from beginning to 
end in public access . . . until these groups 
become the real, frequent beneficiaries of 
the electronic soap box. 

I am not proposing that public access 
centers compromise their fundamental 
philosophy of first come, first serve. I am 
proposing some affirmative action in the 
allocation of your staff, time and re- 
sources. When cable access operators 
have enlisted — not just invited — commu- 
nity groups into public access, you should 
give them extra time for use of your equip- 
ment and studio for production and edit- 
ing simply because they are community 
groups. Your staff should spend more 
time with the representatives of these 
groups than with unaffiliated individuals. 
And, you should offer community groups 
the opportunity to stay longer in the best 
times of your program schedule, simply 
because they are community groups, 

I firmly believe that today it would be 
better for an access operation to produce 
fewer programs in order to make an extra 
effort to engage six or seven members of 
a community organization — an organiza- 
tion with a real constituency— to become 
a vital part of some program. If you in- 
volve six people of an organization of five 
thousand on a program that is of vital in- 
terest or use to the community group, ac- 
cess than has the start of real political con- 



Community Television Review 31 



stituency and a real potential audience. 
And, you have a means to target publicity 
about the program inexpensively through 
the organization's own newsletter, tele- 
phone bank, or meetings. 

To preach the gospel, we need both to 
tell people that there is a promised land 
and to explain how they can get there and 
the rewards of that final destination. We 
must not only invite — we must enlist this 
involvement. 

In my judgement, the constituencies 
and the community groups that you will 
find most interested in the services of 
cable access will be the poor, racial and 
ethnic minorities, and others, who are 
underrepresented segments of our popula- 
tion in the traditional media. Because 
their interests and needs are seldom re- 
flected by mass media, local program- 
ming on cable offers them the opportunity 
to communicate and to learn. 

In most places especially in urban areas, 
when you begin to recognize the full range 
of these groups — people of color, ethnic 
groups, the poor, civil rights advocates, 
civil libertarians, labor unionists, femin- 
ists, the elderly, peace advocates, environ- 
mentalists, children, advocates for honest 
government, alternative artists, the physi- 
cally disabled — these numbers add up to a 
very substantial and powerful group who 
are the natural constituencies to maintain 
a political concensus for public access and 
to build a substantial, impressive audience 
for local programs. 

While these groups are not always the 
upscale audiences that advertisers and 
broadcasters seek, they are a very realistic 
and good audience for cable television. 
These are the people who are looking 
most often for different programming; 
they are usually politically active; these 
are the groups who are the most likely vol- 
unteers for cable access. They have news- 
letters, telephone banks and meetings 
where programming can be promoted; 
and many are members who have disposa- 
ble income — evidenced by the fact that 
they contribute $20-$40 each year to one 
or more organizations. 

When added together, these groups also 
constitute remarkable impressive num- 
bers as a potential audience. Each com- 
munity may differ; but on a national 
basis, when you add together the dues 
paying members of organizations repre- 
senting these groups, they constitute 
something from 15 million to 25 million 
people. Whether cable owners and opera- 
tors are liberal or conservative, moderate 
or radical, Republican or Democrat, these 
are hard numbers which a good cable 



company will not ignore because of its 
need to develop and retain large numbers 
of subscribers. 

I also believe that we can and should 
begin a national satellite service that re- 
flects and involves the best of community 
programming around the country and that 
serves the broad constituencies who have 
been underrepresented by mass media, 
This program service could give national 
exposure to the best of what is produced 
amid the more than seven hundred hours 
a week of original local programming on 
cable across the country. It would also 
begin to provide an outlet for those inde- 
pendent producers who find that even 
public broadcasting is uninterested in 
their work. 



Advocates of Cable Television 

I believe that we must also embrace 
another role. I believe that the advocates 
for public access must also become the ad- 
vocates for cable television. 

It is a role which some independent pro- 
ducers and city administrators of cable 
have found most uncomfortable, if not 
distasteful and repugnant, in the past, and 
the cable industry has not helped us at 
times take this view; nonetheless, I believe 
we must take up the duty of promoting 
the use and the primacy of cable television 
as the best medium for expression and for 
viewing in this country. 

Today there are four mass means of 
electronic communications: 

• Broadcast signals; 

• Direct broadcast satellite; 

• Cable television; 

• Video cassettes. 

It is supremely important that cable 
television be understood as the preferred 
medium of mass communications and 
that every legitimate advantage for success 
be given to cable television even if it oc- 
cassionally is to the detriment of one of 
the other three means of communications. 

While public access has no firm consti- 
tutional pro lection as a part of cable tele- 
vision, it does have a tradition and a size- 
able presence which we must not lose. 
Where else can we find a medium that 
reaches today almost thirty- five million 
households and where on one channel free 
local programming is available to any citi- 
zen? There is no parallel in mass commu- 
nications today. On cable television speech 
is largely free of censorship and free of 
financial barriers. On the other hand, 



broadcast stations have never set aside one 
half a million dollars of equipment — not 
even $200 worth of equipment — or three 
hundred thousand dollars a year for oper- 
ations in any community to permit citi- 
zens to use and develop programming on 
that station as they think it meets their 
own needs and interests. By definition, 
direct broadcast satellite programming 
will have no local presence at all. And, if 
trends continue, we may find in the future 
that the local video store is not the all that 
it appears on first blush. 

Today, more than ten million house- 
holds have video cassette players. By 1986 
its possible that as many as one in four of 
all television households will have a video 
cassette player. 

Although video cassette recorders offer 
an unlimited freedom of choice for the 
viewer (and does not rely upon traditional 
means of distribution of programming), 
their system of distribution offers no 
means by which the tools of producing 
programming will be made available to 
members of the public. Video stores will 
give ultimate freedom of choice for the 
viewer but they will deny equal opportu- 
nity to the producer. 

In the structure of electronic communi- 
cations in the future, cable television of- 
fers the best opportunity for the principles 
of public access to live. Thus, in the future 
cable television must be given every rea- 
sonable opportunity to succeed if public 
access is to succeed. 

Perhaps someday cable access for citi- 
zens will gain constitutional protection. 
While we must try to hasten the time, we 
can not wait for that day. Across this 
country we must recognize now the best 
ways to establish the political concensus 
and an economic base for cable access in 
the future. We must also recognize who 
are our best political constituents and our 
most likely audiences for public access. 
And we must enlist their participation. 

Like the exercise of free speech itself, 
cable access is an exercise in democracy 
. . . exploring new ways of expression and 
empowering all citizens by words, music, 
images, and ideas. Yet, cable access 
should not be a representative democratic 
practice as much as a participatory de- 
mocracy ... a practice where those who 
need a voice are enlisted and assisted to 
use their own . . . where those who need to 
be heard are enlisted and assisted to speak 
for themselves. 

The future of access programming lies 
in this challenge, and with the proper use 
of your collective hands, minds, and 
hearts, this challenge will be met. 



Community Television Review 



Making Telecommunications Ready For Democracy 



By Diana Peck 

This year Diana Peck received the 
George Stoney Award at the NFLCP Na- 
tional Convention, Ms. Peck has worked 
hard for NFLCP as a dedicated advocate 
of community programming. She was 
Chair of the NFL CP Board of Directors 
from July 1981 to July 1983. This is an ex- 
cerpt from her acceptance speech. 



I was reading recently in the New Eng- 
land Journal of Medicine that a local 
group of medical researchers in Atlanta's 
Center for Disease Control had isolated a 
new virus, governmentus ridiculitis, which 
causes a virulent disease local to the 
Washington, D.C. area. We know it more 
commonly as deregulation fever. It is 
known to afflict particularly actors from 
California and no cure has yet been found. 

Congress appears to have caught the 
bug. The Senate has passed S. 66, a bill 
whose purpose is to deregulate cable tele- 
vision. The House, while less afflicted 
with the fever, is working on H.R. 4103, 
which proposes some deregulatory steps. 
The Supreme Court has also caught the 
bug. First there was the Boulder decision 
which challenged the authority of local 
governments to regulate cable. Then there 
was the recent Oklahoma (Crisp) decision 
which ruled that states do not have juris- 
diction over a cable operator's content. 
And finally, there is a hotbed of activity 
for the incubation of deregulation fever at 
the executive branch of the government, 
represented by the FCC. 

In Congress, in the Supreme Court, and 
at the FCC, we see a pattern of deregula- 
tion, in particular a pattern of removing 
regulatory authority from the state and 
local levels and placing it on the federal 
level, where deregulation can proceed. 
And to justify this deregulation, they 
argue simplistically that the new television 
technologies supply us with more channels 
and that more channels automatically 
mean more diversity. More channels does 
not mean diversity if the same program- 
ming suppliers monopolize all delivery 
systems. 



Many access programmers are aware of 
the old analogy that access channels are 
really the electronic parkland of the USA, 
The territory of American television has 
(except for public television) been carved 
up into privately owned land. The people 
who got small lots have, for the most part, 
sold out to the bigger landowners, so that 
the media conglomerates now own huge 
tracts of this territory. In the late 1940s 
and early 1950s, when the FCC was giving 
away the land, they set some aside for the 
public in the form of public television. 
But even that land is not accessible to the 
public anymore as users. Only the access 
channels provide a place where people can 
use— not just look at— this great public 
resource. With deregulation, the land- 
owners are likely to get more powerful, 
while the small enclaves of parkland — 
that's us— struggle to maintain themselves. 

How many people realize that the Equal 
Time Rule and the Fairness Doctrine are 
on the verge of being eliminated? How 
many people understand the implications? 
How many people understand the impor- 
tance of having access channels and local- 
ism in programming? How many people 
understand how fragile local program- 
ming is? We know that the answer is NOT 
MANY. I suspect that we in this room 
represent about ten percent of all the peo- 
ple in the country who really understand 
these issues. Telecommunication issues 
are not only new, they are extremely com- 
plex. But we have not done our job of in- 
forming the American public about their 
importance. 

What disturbs me so greatly is not so 
much that deregulation is going on, but 
rather that it is going on SO QUIETLY. 

When James Watt gave away mineral 
rights in wilderness areas, millions of en- 
vironmentalists all over the country were 
outraged and Washington heard about it! 
If Mark Fowler gives away the Fairness 
Doctrine, Washington will probably hear 
from a handful of public interest advo- 
cates, such as the United Church of Christ, 
the Media Access Project, and .the Tele- 
communications Research and Action 
Center and maybe a few interested indi- 



viduals. If we lose our access to deregula- 
tion, will Washington hear a great hue 
and cry from the American public? Of 
course not. And yet when an access chan- 
nel is taken away from the public, it is no 
different than when the public loses any 
other publicly owned resource. 

But how do we tell people what they are 
losing? How do we assign a value to an ac- 
cess channel? Is it like losing ten acres of 
land? Or ten thousand acres of land? Or 
ten million acres of land? We cannot mea- 
sure access by walking off its boundaries 
the way we can measure land. We can't 
even measure the use of access channels 
the way we measure the use of parkland 
because the majority of those who benefit 
from access are the audience. And most of 
all, we cannot measure the impact of the 
loss of access for future generations. 
When parkland is destroyed by strip min- 
ing or condominiums, we see what our 
children and grandchildren won't have. If 
access disappears, there will simply be one 
more channel of national programming to 
fill in the space. 

We know that without access, we will 
not have a communication democracy. 
We will have an autocracy ruled by the 
media corporations. We, therefore, must 
be the preservers of that democracy. We 
must be the Continental Army of the revo- 
lution of the communication democracy. 
We must continue our work showing peo- 
ple what it means to have democracy — the 
voice of the people — on television. We are 
the ones who have to file comments with 
the FCC on their proposed weakening of 
the Fairness Doctrine. We are the ones 
who have to educate our Congressmen 
about the impact of the pending cable 
legislation and support those members of 
the House who are holding the line against 
deregulation. We are the ones who have to 
write letters to the editors of our news- 
papers when the Supreme Court rules in 
favor of more rights for broadcasters. 
And we are the ones who have to stop 
Senator Packwood's drive to guarantee 
full First Amendment freedoms for broad- 
casters at the expense of the First Amend- 
ment freedoms of the American public. 

If we don't do it, no one else will. 



Community Television Review 33 



NFLCP Awards Night 



The NFLCP awards banquet in Denver was 
held before a live audience of over 600 peo- 
ple. The event was also cablecast live 
throughout the Denver area. The "George 
Stoney Award" the "Community Com- 
munications Award" the "NFLCP" Best 
Region Award," and the "Hometown USA 
Video Festival" awards were all presented. 

The annual "George Stoney Award for 
Humanistic Communications" was awarded to 
Diana Peck (See speech on page 52). Ms. Peck 
was recognized for making an outstanding con- 
tribution to community programming with her 
dedicated leadership of NFLCP while she was 
Chair of the NFLCP Board of Directors (July 
1981 through July 1983). 

The "Community Communications Award" 
went to Marin Community Video in San 
Rafael, California. This access facility has 
been operating for over ten years and is an im- 
portant model of public access at its best. 

There was a tie in the voting for the "Best 
Region Award." Therefore, it went to both the 
Midwest and Central States regions. These two 
regions were recognized for their growth in 
memberships, their regional activities, and 
support to the national office. 

In addition there were 50 awards given to 
participants in the "Hometown USA Festival." 
The number of entries this year was 667 (from 
187 cities in 33 states). The following is a list 
of the award winners: 



Hometown USA Winners 

DOCUMENTARY PROFILE 

Volunteer Single 

1) Jerry Murphy 

"Andrew Wolf: Variations" 
Newton, MA 

Staff Single 

2) Jim Arnold 

"The First 100 Years" 
Pleasant Hill, CA 

DOCUMENTARY PUBLIC AWARENESS 
Volunteer Single 

3) Jamaica Plains Newsreel 
"Farnyard Wharf 

San Francisco, CA 



Staff Single 

4) Dorothy Fadiman 

"World Peace is a Local Issue" 
San Francisco, CA 

DOCUMENTARY EVENT 
Volunteer Series 

5) Caryn Rogoff 
"Black History Month" 
New York, NY 

LOCAL NEWS/MAGAZINE 

Volunteer Single 

6) Barbara Dickson 
"Retirement" 
Dallas, TX 

Staff Single 

7) Dorothy Randoll 
"Community Showcase" 
Dallas, TX 

Volunteer Series 

8) Stan Everett 
"Princeton Newsweek" 
Cincinnati, OH 

Staff Series 

9) Group W. Cable 
"Uptown Local: El Barrio" 
New York, NY 

COMPILATION 
Volunteer 

10) Viacom Cablevision 
"Compilation" 
Mountain View, CA 

Staff 

11) Cable Dekalb 
"Compilation" 
Decatur, GA 

NARROWCAST 

Volunteer Single 

12) Lila Gold worm 

"A Golden Mosaic" 
York, PA 

Staff Single 

13) Ron Hudson 
"Asian Cultural" 
Alhambra, CA 



INSTRUCTIONAL TRAINING 

Volunteer Single 

14) Sharon Brousseau 
"TRS Training Tape" 
Boulder, CO 

Staff Single 

15) Jabari Simama 
"Production Tips Sampler' 9 
Atlanta, GA 

Volunteer Series 

16) Loraine Chambers McCarty 
"Composition in a Portrait" 
Birmington, MI 

Staff Series 

17) JeffLifton 
"Children in Action" 
Baltimore, MD 

SPORTS 

Volunteer Single 

18) Claudia Chotzen 
"Honolulu Wheelchair" 
Honolulu, HI 

Staff Single 

19) Group W Cable 
"Manhattan Gold" 
New York, NY 

Staff Series 

20) Starrs & Doherty 
"Sports Wrap-Up" 
Decatur, GA 

VIDEO ART 

Volunteer Single 

21) Ken Bechman 
"South of LaHonda" 
New York, NY 

Volunteer Series 

22) Terry N. Terry 

"A Taste of the Electric Way" 
East Lansing, MI 

LIVE PROGRAMMING 

Staff Single 

23) Nadine Messina 
"Live Election Night" 
Griffith, IN 



34 Community Television Review 



COMMUNITY PROGRAMMING 

\jL f( MANAGING T HE HIDDE N HESQ[]RCE 5_ )\M\ 



Volunteer Series 

24) Bryan Brooke 

' 4 You 're the Parent: Teenage 

Sexuality" 
Littleton, CO 

Staff Series 

25) Lori Cohen 

4 'Your Opinion Please" 
Quincy, MA 



ENTERTIANMENT 

Volunteer Single 

26) James Bond, Dick Richards, Potsy 

Duncan 
"The American Music Show" 
Atlanta, GA 

27) John Kitchener 
"Portraits" 
Newbury, MA 

Volunteer Series 

28) Doug Wylie 
"Uncle Ducky Show" 
Fort Wayne, IN 

Staff Single 

29) Viacom 30 
"Martin Sight" 
San Rafael, CA 

Staff Series 
Jaimie Davidovich 
"The Live Show" 
New York, NY 



ARTS & CULTURAL EXPRESSION 
Volunteer Single 

31) Larry Evans 

"A Glimpse of Mill Hunk Culture" 
Pittsburgh, PA 

Staff Single 

32) Laina Long 

"Summer Solstice Celebration '83" 
Santa Barbara, CA 

Volunteer Series 

33) Freeman & Maureen Crocker 
"Street Poets'' 

Thornton, CO 



Staff Series 

34) Ann Marie Piersimoni 
"Vertical Interval" 
Alhambra, CA 



PROGRAMMING BY CHILDREN 

Volunteer Single 

35) Susan Murphy 

"A Pool of Hockney" 
Eden Prairie, MN 

Staff Single 

36) Jonathan Anderson 

"A Living Genealogy" 
Torrington, CT 

Volunteer Series 

37) Nancy & Michael Douglas 
"Teenstuff" 

Stamford, CT 

Staff Series 

38) Syracuse/ Upstate New Channels 
"Kid Stuff* 

Syracuse, NY 



INTERACTIVE 

Staff Single 

39) Mark Saltveit 

"A Man of the People" 
Portland, OR 

Volunteer Series 

40) Eugene Shirk 
"National Issues Forum" 
Reading, PA 

Staff Series 

41) Susan Kerr 
"Dallas Interacts" 
Garland, TX 



INSTITUTIONAL NETWORK 

Staff Single 

42) Michael Gitter 

"Tour de Fort '83" 

Fort Collins, CO 



HONORABLE MENTIONS 

DOCUMENTARY PUBLIC AWARENESS 

Staff Single 

1) Group W Cable 
"SRO" 

New York, NY 

LOCAL NEWS/MAGAZINE 
Staff Series 

2) Debbie Marciniak 
"Generations No. 13" 
Baltimore, MD 

ARTS & CULTURAL EXPRESSION 

Volunteer Single 

3) David Garrigus 
"Brothers" 
Carrollton, TX 

Volunteer Series 

4) Louisa S. Bonnie 
"Eat at Arts" 
Cleveland, OH 

ENTERTAINMENT 

Staff Series 

5) Maria Holmes 

"It's A Woman's World" 
Canton, ME 

PROGRAMMING BY CHILDREN 

Volunteer Series 

6) Youth Vision, Inc. 
"Youth Vision Series" 
Providence, RI 

Volunteer Single 
Beverly Foley 
"A New Kid at School" 
Randolph, MA 

INSTITUTIONAL NETWORK 

Staff Single 

8) Kim Krone nberg 

"Health Line East" 

Boston, MA 



Community Television Review 35 



The Convention Exhibitors 



"Community Programming; Managing 
the Hidden Resources/' marked the first 
NFLCP Convention that featured exhibi- 
tors. Convention participants visited these 
exhibits with great interest throughout the 
three-day session. The following compa- 
nies were exhibitors on the floor. 

Warren Anderson 
Phillips Television Systems 
900 Corporate Drive 
Mahwah, NJ 07430 
(201) 529-1550 

Dale Anderson 
Davis Audio Visual, Inc. 
1801 Federal Blvd. 
Denver, CO 80204 
(303) 455-1122 

Lawrence Brinton 
Video Teknix 
633 South Federal 
Denver, Co 80219 
(303) 922-5564 

Mike Albi 

CEAVCO Audio-Visual 
1650 Webster Street 
Denver, CO 80215 
(303) 238-6493 

Jane Swearingen 

Film/Video Equipment Service 

1875 Pearl Street 

Denver, CO 80210 

(303) 778-8616 

Fred Gerling 
Jimmy Rea Electronics 
540 West Broad Street 
Columbus, OH 43215 
(614) 221-5170 

Jeff Stanfield 

Burst Communications, Inc. 
7310 South Alton Way #C 
Engiewood, CO 
(303) 733-8045 

Darryl Keeler 
Fortel Inc. 
2985 Gateway Drive 
Norcross, GA 30071 
(404) 449-4343 



Joseph E. Elliott 
Films Inc. 

773 Green Bay Road 
Wilmette, IL 60091 
(312) 256-4025 

Bal Patterson 
On Camera 
2435 Topaz Drive 
Boulder, CO 80302 
(303) 443-8215 

David B. Marr 
JVC 

7912 S. Vincennes Way 
Engiewood, CO 80112 
(303) 796-8833 

David Burt 
New Visions 
P.O. Box 599 
Aspen, CO 81612 
(303) 925-2640 

Todd J. Schieffert 

ADC Magnetic Controls Company 

6000 S. Ulster, Suite 201 

Denver, CO 801 1 1 

(303) 850-7016 



James Pierce 

National Federation of State 

Humanities Councils 
1836 Blake 
Denver, CO 80202 
(303) 292-4458 

Kirk Basefsky 
Ampex Corp. 
Magnetic Tape Division 
6615 S. Field Street 
Littleton, CO 80123 
(303) 979-3959 

Tom Wood 
Texscan, Inc. 
8058 S. Trenton Court 
Engiewood, CO 80112 
(303) 694-9228 

Jay S. Gierkey 
Grass Roots Television 
4200 Bluff Lane 
Sugar Loaf Mountain 
Cedar, MI 49621 
(616) 228-5015 




Convention participants gather in the exhibition hall. 



36 Community Television Review 



How Local Programming Made the Cut at 
NCTA'S 1984 Convention 



By Adam Haas 

While attending this year's National 
Cable Television Association Convention, 
I was curious to find out what prospects 
lay ahead for local cable programming. 
These trade shows create an uncanny 
microcosim of the cable industry as a 
whole, reflecting its values and directions. 
At the last NCTA convention I attended 
in 1982, theie seemed to be quite an inter- 
est and focus on local origination and 
public access programming. Have things 
changed since 1982? Where are the indus- 
try's current priorities? I found a mixed 
bag for local programming with some 
good news and some bad. 

The convention exhibit hall provided a 
number of answers. Companies with 
booths at the convention run the gambit 
of the industry. Virtually every ingredient 
in the cable TV business was represented 
on the convention floor. 

In 1982, there were all kinds of new 
companies being formed and announced 
at NCTA. The exhibit floor was jammed 
with new enterprises hocking their ser- 
vices. However, by 1984 many of these 
companies either never got off the ground 
or found cable* s blue sky too overcast to 
meet financial forecasts. With sixty- five 
fewer booths, this year's exhibit hall 
reflected the current financial crisis within 
the industry. 

Those companies exhibiting at NCTA 
this year were there to do bottom-line 
business, and no longer had the promo- 
tions budget to lure conventioneers to 
their booths with expensive give-a-ways. 
In contrast to 1982's free t-shirts, towels, 
tote bags, etc., this year's convention of- 
fered apples, granola, and beef jerky. 



Fewer Equipment Vendors 

What concerned me most about the 
1984 exhibit hall was the lack of equip- 
ment vendors targeted for L.O. and access 
application. In 1982, the hall boasted 
some nine exhibits designed specifically 
for the access and L.O. production mar- 
ket. There were numerous mobile vans on 
display, editing systems, cameras, charac- 
ter generators, switchers, etc. This year, I 



counted only four major video production 
vendors. 

I asked the video vendors on the floor 
why they thought there was such a dearth 
of video production exhibits, and why 
they decided to attend. Bob Wickland, 
Manager Customer Service for Micro- 
time, Inc., said that the NCTA show has 
become much more software oriented. As 
a result, the technical types aren't attend- 
ing NCTA anymore. Instead, they are go- 
ing to the NAB Convention. Since those 
purchasing equipment do not attend 
NCTA, the amount of actual business is 
very slim. Wickland identified the biggest 
impediment to participate in the NCTA 
convention: < 'These shows are expensive 
and unless you write a lot of orders, the 
booth won't pay for itself." However, 
Wickland felt it was worthwhile to attend 
the show, both to make personal contacts 
and to find out the needs of the cable 
market. 

Judging by booth sizes of some of the 
vendors, the commitment of certain com- 
panies to the local programming market is 
minimal. Sony Corporation is one such 
company. Instead of an elaborate set up 
as in the past, they had a small corner 
booth this year in which they were show- 
ing a new titler and graphics computer. 
There wasn't a camera or any ENG equip- 
ment to be seen. The Sony representative 
watching over the booth seemed to resent 
the fact that he was assigned to the show. 

However, the JVC booth conveyed an 
entirely different message. It was a large 
display which showed off new cameras, 
VCR's, 3 A " and Vi " editing systems, and 
an ingenius recam. The feeling there was 
very upbeat. Logan Enright, one of the 
JVC reps, at the booth, explained it this 
way: "Our products best meet the needs 
of cablecasters dollar for dollar. Others 
have products that are too expensive. We, 
on the other hand, enjoy a lot of success 
in cable." 

Both in terms of cost and simplicity, it's 
clear that JVC has gone after the commu- 
nity programming market and captured a 
significant portion of it. 



Encouragement From 
Software Vendors 

Although the hardware commitment to 
local programming was unimpressive at 
the convention, the software end was 
more encouraging. With all major pro- 
gram suppliers represented on the exhibit 
floor, it is easy to target those with strong- 
est interest in community programming. 
Neither ESPN or USA networks showed 
as much appreciation of local program- 
ming. This can be explained by their 
100% commercial broadcast orientation. 
The program director at ESPN said their 
service covered most sporting events with 
its own crew and equipment. They are 
occasionally interested in outside sports 
coverage, but the quality must be top- 
notch. A programmer at USA explained 
that their service, originally a sports net ex- 
clusively, is expanding its format to reach 
a larger share of the non- sports audience. 
But because it relies mostly on advertising 
dollars, USA is only interested in pro- 
grams of mass appeal and not of the genre 
typically developed by community pro- 
grammers. 

Mary Alice Dwyer-Dobbin of Lifetime 
had some mildly encouraging words. 
First, she explained most cable networks 
have come to realize that producing their 
own original programming is too costly. 
As such, Lifetime and others are doing 
less and less production. As a result, ac- 
quisitions from independent producers 
are increasing. Dwyer-Dobbin said that 
initially, independents were asking exorbi- 
tant licensing fees. Now with the under- 
standing that cable is no longer a boom in- 
dustry, independents are expecting less. 
When asked whether Lifetime is soliciting 
programming, Dwyer-Dobbin explained 
that they're interested in looking at pilots. 

Lenda Washington of The Learning 
Channel put it bluntly: "We simply don't 
have the money to produce our own pro- 
gramming." The result is a satellite service 
completely comprised of acquired prod- 
ucts. The Learning Channel offers numer- 
ous "how to" educational series. Their 
programming style tends to be less slick 
and more thoughtful than other satellite 



Community Television Review 37 



networks, A well produced L.O. or access 
series might have a place on The Learning 
Channel. The service has already set an in- 
dustry wide precedent by becoming the 
first satellite network to solicit and screen 
the work of independent film and video 
producers. 

Clearly the most encouraging news 
came from Curtis Davis, Vice-President 
of Programming for Arts and Entertain- 
ment (A & E). A & E is another service 
which relies entirely on acquisition. Until 
now their acquisitions have come from 
conventional sources— the BBC, syndica- 
tors, etc. But Davis has developed an in- 
triguing concept for what he terms "Pro- 
ducing Consortia," which rely on local 
cable programmers as a key party, A pro- 
ducing consortium is made up of four en- 
tities and is formed as follows: a local 
cable production entity identifies a local 
art event which is of a caliber deserving 
national attention, The producers contact 
A & E to determine interest. If Mr. Davis 
thinks the project has merit, the two other 
entities must then be identified: one, a 
local non-profit arts organization, and 
two, a local corporation or business to 
serve as sponsor using the project both as 
a tax write-off (with the arts organization 
serving as a pass through) and as a vehicle 
for national exposure on A & E. It's an 
exciting concept which could be a boon to 
all four members of the consortium. 

An Absence of Community 
Programming Workshops 

Besides the exhibit hall, the NCTA 
convention workshop sessions provide 
another glimpse of the industry's priori- 
ties. In 1982, two convention workshops 
were devoted to community program- 
ming. This year, there were none. 

Was the NCTA, the conference orga- 
nizer, sending a message to community 
programmers — that local programming is 
simply not important to the cable indus- 
try? 

This was not at all the intention, ac- 
cording to Char Beals, Vice-President of 
Programming and Marketing for NCTA. 
"We wanted to give local programming a 
profile at the convention but were unsuc- 
cessful due to lack of interest," said 
Beales. Conference organizers planned to 
host a panel entitled Making L.O. Viable 
Economically, but prospective speakers 
approached by Beals all declined the in- 
vitation. "MSO's were much tighter this 
year in their allocation of who came. 
Local programmers, who had attended in 
previous years, weren't allowed to this 



year." "(The cable industry) is in a transi- 
tional period," says Beals. "Local pro- 
gramming has to give something tangible 
back to the system, both in the commer- 
cial and marketing areas. Once this hap- 
pens, than you'll see more of an emphasis 
on local program production," 

But Beals is optimistic about the future. 
A greater emphasis on both L.O, and na- 
tional programming is planned for next 
year's convention. 

The 1984 NCTA Convention's minimal 
emphasis on local programming should 
concern community programmers. Com- 
munity programming will not survive 
without industry support and recognition. 
The NCTA Convention should provide an 
opportunity to showcase local program- 
ming successes. Our presence should be 
felt in the exhibit hall and particularly, the 
workshop sessions. 

The low profile of community program- 
ming at the NCTA Convention under- 



scores two pressing needs. First, we 
should offer our assistance to NCTA in 
designing next year's convention so that a 
broader exposure of community program- 
ming is insured. Second, and most impor- 
tantly, we should work more closely with 
cable companies to demonstrate in a con- 
crete fashion the value of community pro- 
gramming for the cable operator. Once 
community programming is recognized 
for its bottom-line benefit to MSO's, it 
will no longer be a second class citizen at 
the annual trade show. Once it becomes 
an industry priority, local programming 
will be a highlight at future NCTA con- 
ventions. 



Adam Haas is the Regional Director of 
Programming for Rogers Cablesystems of 
Portland, He has been an active member 
of the Federation since 1979, and served 
as Vice-Chairman for NFL CP Board of 
Directors in 1983. 



CONGRATULATIONS 

to the winners 
of the Hometown 
USA Video Festival 

Boston Community Access 
and Programming Foundation 

Cablevision of Connecticut 

HIICABLEMSION 



38 Community Television Review 



THE COMMUNITY VIDEOT: 
A Resource of Technical Tips 



By Dave Bloch 

This column will follow a different for- 
mat from the usual question-and-answer 
one. Your "Videot" author moderated a 
Convention workshop on technical tips 
with experts Bill Makely of Albuquerque 
and Ed Fiddler from Massachusetts. The 
panelists and audience shared great ideas 
with one another. Some of those ideas are 
described below. 

Inexpensive Set Materials: 

A company called "On Camera' ■ exhib- 
ited a package of modular set pieces at the 
convention aimed at users with small 
budgets. Call them in Boulder, Colorado 
at (303) 443-8215. 

As an alternative to the blue-curtain- 
and-potted-palm background so overused 
in access (and broadcast!) interview 
shows j try using stepladders in different 
positions. Place small plants and 
paraphernalia on the rungs, run boards 
between them to hang posters or pictures, 
or shine lights through them to form in- 
teresting shadows on the backdrop. The 
ladders provide many three-dimensional 
opportunities to the imaginative pro- 
ducer. 



Inexpensive Graphics: 

To make slides of text, symbols or logos 
for keying over video, buy some 35mm 
"Kodalith" graphic arts film. This 
material is very easy and fast to shoot and 
process, and yields extremely sharp and 
contrasty white-on-black slides from a 
black -on- white original. You can even 
color the clear area of the slide with over- 
head transparency markers! A full-line 
camera store should be able to help you 
select the film and processing chemicals 
you need. 

Audio Cables: 

If you are tired of never having the right 
connector at the end of the cable to fit the 
equipment, standardize on 3 -prong XLR 
connectors for all your cables. Then, 
make up short (12- to 18-inch) cables to 
adapt the XLR's to everything else you 
use (RCA phono, phone, mini-phone, 
even spade lugs for screw terminals). 

When you wind up audio cables, alter- 
nate winding the cable on opposite sides 
of the loop. When the cable is unravelled, 
there will be no twists in it. 



Scrounging: 

Watch for television and radio stations 
moving to new quarters! They may allow 
you to strip their old studios of any old 
stuff left behind. Old amplifiers, speak- 
ers, lighting instruments, and grip pipe 
can be pressed into service when you need 
it. 

The Tool Kit: 

Your basic video tool kit should include 
at least the following: soldering iron, 
solder (wrap six inches around the power 
cord and you'll never be without it!), volt- 
ohmmeter, screwdrivers (Phillips, flat and 
jeweller's), nutdrivers (at least a l A ", but a 
whole set is better), needlenose and slip- 
joint pliers, 6" adjustable wrench, Allen 
wrench set, folding knife, electrical tape, 
ductape (or gaffer's tape), crimper for 
F-connectors, and wire stripper. 



Dave Bloch is Manager of Local Program- 
ming/or the Davis Community Cable Co- 
operative in Davis, California, 



Congratulations to all 1984 Hometown USA Festival winners for 
their outstanding contributions to community programming. 



A Special Salute to Our Community Programming Staffs in Cleve- 
land, OH, San Francisco, CA, Marin, CA, and Mountain View, CA. 



„ ^iacom 
Cablevision 

MORE OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR 



Community Television Review 39 



Whose First Amendment Is It, Anyway? 



By Michael Meyerson 

The battle over the First Amendment 
and cable television rages in the courts, in 
Congress, and in state houses and city 
councils. The issue of the First Amend- 
ment status of cable television is not just 
an academic exercise or semantic quibble. 
Rather, the rights and responsibilities of 
government (at the federal, state and local 
level) concerning such diverse issues as 
public and leased access, exclusive fran- 
chises and rate regulation will be deter- 
mined in a large measure by the resolution 
of this question. 

When a novel legal issue such as this 
arises, the first response of the lawyer, 
trained in history and precedent, is to find 
an analogy. The lawyer looks for some- 
thing with the twin virtues of being similar 
and already discussed by the courts. 

Thus, the cable industry has argued that 
the cable television operator is just like a 
newspaper publisher, while those who 
favor regulation, such as the National 
League of Cities, contend that cable is just 
like broadcast television. If either analogy 
were accepted, the legal result would be, 
not surprisingly, just what its proponent 
desires. 

If the cable operator is viewed as a "tele- 
publisher,'* then the government could do 
nothing to the cable operator which it 
could not do to a newspaper publisher. 
That would mean virtually no regulation 
of any kind: no access requirements, no 
must-carry rules, no rate regulation, and 
no licensing apart from telling each cable 
company what would be a convenient day 
for them to dig up a particular city street. 

If, on the other hand, the broadcast 
model is used, then all the regulations 
which can be imposed on broadcasters can 
be imposed on the cable operator. Rules 
governing access and licensing, along with 
heavy government involvement, would 
therefore be permissible. 

The advantage to arguing by analogy is 
that it makes the ultimate resolution of 
the difficult legal question quite simple, 
once you have found the right analogy. 
The problem is that sometimes arguing by 
analogy is circuitous, simplistic and just 
plain silly. 

For example, cable television is ob- 
viously vastly different from newspapers 



(imagine the practical difficulties of lining 
your bird cage with a 450 megahertz co- 
axial cable). Most importantly, where 
there has been a historic "wall of separa- 
tion" between newspapers and the gov- 
ernment, the cable television operator and 
the government have always been, and 
continue to be, deeply entwined. The local 
government gives the cable operator the 
right to dig up the public streets and use 
limited utility pole space. The local gov- 
ernment protects the cable operator from 
competing cable companies, since the 
franchise is either a contractual or a de 
facto monopoly. Finally, the federal gov- 
ernment helps the cable operator by fixing 
the rates the operator must pay for use of 
utility poles and broadcast programs. 

The other crucial difference between 
cable and newspapers concerns the eco- 
nomics of the two forms of communica- 
tion. While it is extraordinarily expensive 
to operate either a cable system or a news- 
paper in a large city, it is not uncommon 
to have two or more newspapers compet- 
ing in the same town. (With the advent of 
USA Today, most newspaper consumers 
have a choice.) By contrast, more than 
99% of the cable systems do not face com- 
petition from another cable system for the 
same subscribers. 

Also, if a writer wishes to bypass the 
newspaper, there are still numerous other 
means for his or her words to be spread. 
From magazines to weekly newspapers, 
from monthly journals to the occasional 
pamphlet, writers can communicate with 
the public. 

The analogy of cable to broadcast tele- 
vision is not much stronger. While, in one 
sense, cable and broadcast television pro- 
grams "look alike," there are significant 
differences as well. First, the broadcaster 
has only one channel to program; the cable 
operator has 24, 36, 54 or more. Second, 
broadcasting is a "federal case"— only the 
federal government can regulate broad- 
casting. Because of its use of streets and 
public rights-of-way, cable is involved with 
local, as well as the national go vera menu 

So, if neither analogy holds water, how 
does the issue of the First Amendment 
and cable television get resolved? The 
solution is to use the principles behind the 



regulation of newspaper and broadcast 
television (as well as that other conduit of 
communication, the telephone system) to 
evaluate each proposed regulation. 

Let's use public access as an example. 
Public access serves many important First 
Amendment functions without the danger 
of government censorship. The Supreme 
Court has stated that the First Amend- 
ment, "rests on the assumption that the 
widest possible dissemination of informa- 
tion from diverse and antagonistic sources 
is essential to the welfare of the public." 
Access, which permits all individuals and 
institutions in a community to communi- 
cate electronically with the rest of the 
community, provides for a truly diverse 
public forum. 

The First Amendment also protects the 
individual's right of free expression and 
the cable television viewer's right to 
receive information. Both of these goals 
are furthered by public access. 

Public access also has the advantage of 
not violating the paramount obligation of 
the government to remain neutral in the 
marketplace of ideas. Non-discriminatory, 
first-come, first-served access does not 
allow the government to help those view- 
points with which it. agrees, nor penalize 
those opinions it opposes. Unlike even the 
Fairness Doctrine for broadcasters, which 
requires the government to judge the con- 
tent of a television program to determine 
if an opposing speaker should be permit- 
ted to reply, public access does not require 
the government to police the content of 
anyone's speech. 

The application of the First Amend- 
ment to different proposed regulations of 
cable television will not always be easy. It 
would well serve all who deal with these 
issues to remember the words of Supreme 
Court Justice Byron White: "It is the pur- 
pose of the First Amendment to preserve 
an uninhibited marketplace of ideas in 
which the truth will ultimately prevail, 
rather than to countenance monopoliza- 
tion of that market, whether it be by the 
government itself or a private licensee." 



Michael Meyerson is a Professor of Law 
at Brooklyn Law School. 



40 Community Television Review 



First of Two Parts 



Rethinking Public Access 



By Brian Kahin 

On February 15, 1984, with negotiations 
on cable deregulation again underway be- 
tween the cities and the cable industry, 
House Telecommunications Subcommit- 
tee Chairman Timothy Wirth sent a letter 
to his colleagues on the Energy and Com- 
merce Committee outlining a national 
plan for funding "noncommercial access 
programming." 

The plan was based on the tentative 
agreement that 5% of gross cable system 
revenues would be an acceptable franchise 
fee under H.R. 4103. Wirth proposed that 
this 5% be structured as follows: The 
nominal franchise fee would be 4%, one- 
fourth of which (1% of system gross) 
would go to fund local access develop- 
ment and production. On top of the 4%, 
another 1% of the gross would go to "a 
national fund or funds for the production 
and development of noncommerical access 
programming of national and regional in- 
terest, for distribution to city, public and 
educational access channels free or at a 
minimal charge." 

What would this programming look 
like? The same paragraph goes on to say: 
"Only a national pooling of funds will 
allow for the development of expensive, 
high quality programming of interest to 
many communities, such as a show like 
'Sesame Street.' " 

Sesame Street certainly does not look or 
feel like access programming. It is a multi- 
million dollar product of the Children's 
Television Workshop and the public tele- 
vision system, which, whatever its virtues, 
does not readily provide access for outsid- 
ers. Indeed, "quality" serves it as both 
banner and shield. The 1% for a national 
fund looks very much like the 1%-of-gross 
spectrum fee that Wirth had wanted as the 
price for television deregulation, which 
would have been used to fund public tele- 
vision. 

A close reading of the letter suggests 
that Wirth *s primary interest is not access 
but diversity — a value that is even harder 
to define or measure. "Diversity," like 
"quality," is a public television buzz- 
word, but there is no monopoly at this 
level of generality. The three networks 
talk "quality," and they argue that they 



provide enough "diversity" to satisfy 
most of the American public. "Quality" 
is conventionally measured by the size of 
the production budget, but "diversity" is 
hard to pin down. And certainly public 
access programming provides a kind of di- 
versity found nowhere else on television. 

The 1984 Democratic Party platform 
includes a plank on telecommunications 
introduced by Wirth. It reads, in pertinent 
part: 

"This electronic marketplace is so 
fundamental to our future as a democracy 
(as well as to our economy) that social and 
cultural principles must be as much a part 
of communications policy as a commit- 
ment to efficiency, innovation, and com- 
petition. The principles are diversity, the 
availability of a wide choice of informa- 
tion services and sources; access, the ability 
of all Americans, not just a privileged few, 
to take advantage of this growing array of 
information services and sources; and op- 
portunity, particularly by minorities and 
women, that will give every American the 
ability to take advantage of the computer 
and telecommunications revolution." 

"Access," in these terms, sounds like 
access to information as in the public 
library model, "Opportunity" here 
sounds more like access to media distribu- 
tion systems, the kind of access prescribed 
by the fairness doctrine and other broad- 
casting regulations, than the kind associ- 
ated with access channels on cable. 

The problem is, access means many 
things, depending on whether the access 
constituency is the viewing public, the 
producing public, or both. 

As an institution, public access has 
evolved on three main principles: 

1 . Freedom of Expression: Access en- 
sures that diverse ideas can be heard and 
seen on the dominant medium of our time. 

2. Community Service: Access serves 
local needs by increasing and enhancing 
communication at the local level. 

3. Media Literacy: Access enables indi- 
viduals and small organizations to learn to 
use the medium of television. (As a pre- 
requisite to community service or self- 
expression — or as a first step in a televi- 
sion career.) 



The audience is the direct beneficiary of 
the community service principle, whereas 
the producer is the direct beneficiary in 
the other cases. Ultimately, the benefits go 
both ways — e.g., freedom of expression 
offers new ideas to the community — but 
not in perfect symmetry. Certainly, local 
programmers are likely to be well inform- 
ed of community needs, but should they 
necessarily be limited to locally produced 
programming? That might be a bad case 
of reinventing the wheel. Why not use a 
well-produced (perhaps professionally 
produced) public service program, the 
cost of which can be spread over many 
communities, perhaps the whole country? 
This, of course, is the reasoning behind 
Wirth's national programming fund. 

Wirth's proposal did not generate much 
interest. The cities were not interested be- 
cause it would leave them with 3% rather 
than 5% of the system gross. It had no 
natural constituency; it called for a new 
institution at the national level that would 
radically affect the practice of community 
programming and implicitly challenge the 
role of public television. Nonetheless, it 
raises fundamental questions about the 
future of access. 

Cable access began well before satellite 
delivery became commonplace. In 1972, 
the FCC mandated a single public access 
channel on high-capacity systems along 
with single educational and government 
access channels. In 1979 the Supreme 
Court (in Midwest Video II) held that 
these requirements were beyond the statu- 
tory jurisdiction of the FCC. Local au- 
thorities, no longer preempted by federal 
rule, were then free to demand multiple 
public access channels in franchising 
RFPs. Access grew hydraheaded as spec- 
trum was stockpiled in the public interest. 
Complex hybrids were created — like the 
Boston Community Access and Program- 
ming Foundation, which looked like a 
new kind of public television. 

Furthermore, under the 1972 rules ac- 
cess production was unsubsidized, except 
for five minutes of live studio time. Pro- 
duction equipment had to be made avail- 
able, but it was to be rented at reasonable 
cost. New franchises have required not 



Community Television Review 41 



only free use of equipment, but also train- 
ing and, finally, discretionary funds. 

Wirth proposed to take the discretion- 
ary funding national, to fund in due 
course as much as $300 million/yr. in new 
productions, twice the national program- 
ming budget of public television. 

But what is national access program- 
ming? Is it Sesame Street cast into the 
public domain, to be played and replayed, 
perhaps on videodisc — over the air, over 
cable, and in suitably equipped preschools? 
Is it information programming with all 
rights cleared, libraried for use at the re- 
quest of community organizations? Or 
program material from national organiza- 
tions to be used and reused by local chap- 
ters or affiliates? 

There are needs and opportunities here 
that could be met by access — at least more 
likely by access than by public television. 
But access may already be so established 
as a local institution that it will not readily 
adapt to a larger scale of operation. The 
great gap between access and public tele- 
vision may never be filled, or it may be 
filled by another institution, such as the 
Learning Channel, or something entirely 
new and ad hoc, such as Wirth' s fund. 

What are the dimensions of this gap? 



First, of course, nearly all public access 
programming is locally produced. It varies 
from station to station, but generally local 
production accounts for only a few per- 
centage points of public television pro- 
gramming. 

That is symptomatic of deep differ- 
ences. The public television professional- 
ism has relegated volunteers to minor 
fundraising roles. The economics of pro- 
duction are similar to commercial tele- 
vision: labor costs make local productions 
uneconomic, and only high-visibility na- 
tional programming generates broad view- 
er support. Access producers supply their 
own labor and are generally responsible 
for building their own audiences. 

Generally, access production is charac- 
terized by low direct costs— labor, publici- 
ty, and supplies (tape is inexpensive and 
reusable). The cost of the channel, espe- 
cially in unfilled high -capacity systems, is 
also very low compared with the broad- 
cast transmission plant and the commer- 
cial value of broadcast spectrum. (The 
collective annual budget of the public 
television system is some $850 million, not 
including the value of the spectrum; out 
of this total PBS national programming 
accounts for less than $150 million.) 



At present, very few community pro- 
grammers have any budget for outside ac- 
quisitions. Indeed, a discretionary fund of 
any kind looks inconsistent with a pure 
access philosophy. Whereas, public tele- 
vision actively programs (chooses content) 
like any broadcaster, public access oper- 
ates as a common carrier; the access man- 
ager allows the public to program on a 
first-come first-served basis which is, in 
theory, content-blind. 

Allocation of access time and facilities 
can be handled without much conflict as 
long as demand stays low relative to sup- 
ply. But what happens when things get 
tight? Perhaps uniform limits are set and 
large users are told to move their excess 
load onto leased access — or elsewhere. 
Otherwise, the public access manager 
starts making hard decisions and becomes 
a PROGRAMMER. Where there is dis- 
cretionary money available, there are 
bound to be a lot of demands. Remember 
that in Boston it's the Community Access 
AND Programming Foundation. 

Brian Kahin is Coordinator for the Re- 
search Program on Communications Pol- 
icy at the Massachusetts Institute of Tech- 
nology, 




/IMERIOIN OIBLESYSTEMS 
Congratulates it's Hometown Video Winners 



LIVE PROGRAMMING: 

l^Quincy Cablesystems: "Your Opinion Please" 

ENTERTAINMENT: 

Newbury Cablesystems: "Portraits" 



PROGRAMMING BY CHILDREN: 

Randolph Cablesystems: "A New Kid at School" 



ft Congratulations one and all! ft 



42 Community Television Review 



Classified Ads 



Send all ads with payment to: 
NFLCP 

906 Pennsylvania Ave,* SE 
Washington, DC 20003 

The price of all classified ads in CTR is $13 
per column inch. There are 20 words in a col- 
umn inch. To calculate the price of an ad, 
divide the number of words by 20 and multiply 
that times 13, The minimum price for a 
classified ad is $13. All checks must be made 
payable to NFLCP. For more information con- 
tact: Paul D'Ari, NFLCP, 906 Pennsylvania 
Ave., SE, Washington, DC 20003, (202) 
544-7272. 



A Community Programming 
Outlet 

Soujourn Productions is developing a na- 
tionwide magazine format for local pro- 
gramming, and is looking for interested ac- 
cess producers and independent producers. 
For more information contact: 

Jay Gierkey 
Sojourn Productions 
Route One 
Cedar, MI 49621 
(616) 228-5015 

Executive Director and 
Chief Engineer 

Minneapolis Telecommunications Net- 
work (MTN) is seeking its first Executive 
Director and Chief Engineer. MTN is a non- 
profit corporation created by the City of 
Minneapolis to manage the dedicated public 
cable TV channels* 

Qualifications for the Executive Director 
include management experience in ad- 
ministering budgets of at least $500,000 and 
management experience in cable TV or 
broadcast. Salary dependent upon 
qualifications in the range of $35,000 to 
$50,000. 

Qualifications for the Chief Engineer in- 
clude supervisory engineering experience in 
video production and cable television. 
Salary dependent upon qualifications in the 
range of $25,000 to $35,000. 

For full information and applications 
contact: 

Will Loew-Blosser 
MTN, 317M, City Hall 
Minneapolis, MN 55415 
(612) 333-5194 

MTN is an equal opportunity and affir- 
mative action employer. 



OPERATIONS MANAGER 

Milwaukee Access Telecommunications 
Authority (MATA), a non-profit corpora- 
tions, is seeking a full time Operations 
Manager to oversee a public access facility 
which would generate programming on two 
cable channels. Competitive salary and 
benefits. For more information contact: 

Timothy J. Keeiey 
City of Milwaukee 
Personnel Department 
200 East Wells Street, Room 706 
Milwaukee, WI 53203 

Women and minorities are stongly en- 
couraged to apply. 



A REFERENCE BOOK FOR 
CHILDREN'S COMMUNITY 
CABLE 

A project is underway to provide a com- 
prehensive national reference book on 
children's use of cable television: This book 
will include information about types of ex- 
isting programs; subject involvement; 
facilities; staffing; community size and par- 
ticipation; funding; franchise agreements; 
and additional relevant information. 

The reference book would be helpful to 
persons interested in becoming involved in 
children's programming and to those 
already in the field. The information and 
models it provides will help determine 
resources available in the community for 
developing children's programming. Those 
already producing children's programming 
will be able to compare their work with 
what is being done elsewhere and explore 
new ideas. 

If you would like your program included 
or would like some more information con- 
cerning this project, please contact: 

Paula A, Schwartz 
Coordinator of Emerging Technologies 
Teachers College, Columbia University 
Box 8, 525 West 120th St. 
N.Y., N.Y. 10027 



ACCESS OPERATIONS 
MANAGER 

Acadiana Open Channels, Inc. is interview- 
ing for an operations manager. Skills re- 
quired include management of operations, 
scheduling, cataloging and training of day 
to day operations. Also required is a pro- 
fessional knowledge of video equipment, 
production skills and training. Organization 
skills are a must. Two years of production 
experience in a video center is required. 
Salary range $15 - 18,000 yearly. Send 
resume and resume tape to: 

Acadiana Open Channels, Inc. 
124 East Main Street 
Lafayette, LA 70501 

# 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF 

MONTGOMERY 
COMMUNITY TELEVISION 

Montgomery Community Television, Inc., 
a newly-created independent, nonprofit cor- 
poration established to produce and 
manage community access on franchisee's 
countywide cable system, seeks a highly 
motivated and experienced individual to 
serve as Executive Director. The Executive 
Director will supervise staff and a contrac- 
tor in the promotion, support, and produc- 
tion of locally-produced cable programm- 
ing including public access, government ac- 
cess, and educational access with an annual 
budget of approximately $2 million. Person 
must have strong leadership skills and solid 
experience in; management of a major 
enterprise, contract and budget administra- 
tion, staff support to a Board of Directors 
and advisory committees, television produc- 
tion and public access, community 
outreach, and mobilization of volunteers. 
Selection of candidates for interviews will 
occur in late October. Board desires Ex- 
ecutive Director to be available to start work 
in December, 1984. Interesed persons 
should send statement of qualifications and 
salary requirements to: 

Mr, Roger S. Nelson 
Board of Directors 
Montgomery Community Television, Inc. 
c/o Montgomery County Division of Cable 
Television and Telecommunications Policy 
101 Monroe Street — 5th Floor 
Rockville, MD 20850 



Hometown 

Festival 

Videotapes 



Set for 
National 
Tour 



COMMUNITY TELEVISION AT ITS BEST 



The Hometown USA Bicycle Tour 
presents amont the best local programs 
that cable television has to offer. These 
programs were selected from nearly 700 
videotapes that entered the 1984 
Hometown USA Video Festival. Half of 
the tapes are produced by public access 
volunteers and the other half are produc- 
ed by staff members of local cable com- 
panies. There were nearly fifty award 
winners. The bicycle tour includes eight 
of those programs in three one hour 
videotapes. 

If you wish to rent this package, fill out 
the form at the bottom of this page, and 
return it to the National Federation of 
Local Cable Programmers, 906 Penn- 
sylvania, Ave., S.E., Washington, D.C 
20003. 

Here are the programs in the 
Hometown USA Bicycle Tour; 



Honolulu Wheelchair Marathon, 

Honolulu, Hawaii (30 minutes from the 
Sports Category), is a documentary that 
examines wheelchair atheletes competing 
in a marathon race. 

TRS Training Tape, Boulder, Col- 
orado (16 minutes from the Instructional 
Training Category), describes the use of 
"the grip " a recently developed artificial 
limb. 

Andrew Wolf: Variations, Boston, 
Massachusetts (15 minutes from the 
Documentary Profile Category), is a 
documentary profile of pianist/composer 
Andrew Wolf. 

Uptown Local: El Bario, New York, 
New York (28 minutes from the Local 
News/Magazine Category), is a profile 
of a Hispanic neighborhood in New York 
City. 

Dallas Interacts, Dallas, Texas (30 
minutes from the Interactive Category), 



is a live public affairs program on 
Warner-Amex's QUBE system. The pro- 
gram includes discussions on topics rang- 
ing from the environment to national 
defense, and is hosted by Dallas City 
Councilman Wes Wise. 

Vertical Interval, Alhambra, Califor- 
nia (30 minutes from the Arts and 
Cultural Expresion Category), is a news 
magazine format that features the work 
of local artists. 

A Pool of Hockney, Eden Prairie, 
Minnesota (12 minutes from the Pro- 
gramming by Children Category), was 
produced by six children. The program 
reveals the response of children to the 
works of artists David Hockeny. 

World Peace is a Local Issue, San 
Francisco, California (20 minutes from 
the Documentary Public Awareness 
Category), examines how the City Coun- 
cil of Palo Alto, California responded to 
citizen concerns about world peace. 



YES! I WANT TO RENT HOMETOWN USA FOR A 10 DAY PERIOD. 
ENCLOSED PLEASE FIND A CHECK FOR $120. 

Name Organization 

Street C ity 



State . Zip Code Telephone . 

Rental Week 



(first choice) (second choice) 

Make check payable to NFLCP. 



Return to: NFLCP 

906 Pennslyvania Ave., S.E. 
Washington, D.C. 20003 




NFLCP Membership— 
Your Ticket to Free Issues 



J of the Community Television Review 



INDIVIDUAL; 

Community Associate/Student 

($35) 

„ Professional ($50) 

ORGANIZATION: 

Non-profit organization 

Educational Institution 

($90) 

Government Entities: 
Population Size: 

Under 100,000 (SI 00) 

100.000-500,000 ($150) 

Over 500,000 ($200) 



{"Government Entities" includes 
municipalities, states, counties and 
cable commissions ) 



NEW MEMBER ENROLLMENT FORM] 



Patron ($100) 

Charter Life ($500) 

Library (S75) 

For-profit organization 

($150) 

Cable System or MSO 
No of Subscribers: 

_ Under 10,000 ($150} 

10,000-50,000 ($400) 

Over 50,000 ($600) 



Name: 

(or Organization) 

Address: 



(please print) 



City: . 



_Zip:. 



Phone ( 



Contact Person 



(Organizational Members Only) 



("Cable System/MSO" includes 
cable company -operated access 
and local origination facilities ) 



(NOTE: These rates wiJI be in effect until Aug 31.1 985) 

Make your check/money order payable to NFLCP 

Mail to: National Federation of Local Cable Programmers 

906 Pennsylvania Ave S£ 

Washington, DC 20003 




Community Television Review 
NFLCP 

906 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E. 
Washington, D,C 20003 



Non-profit Org. 
U.S. Postage 
PAID 
Washington, D.C. 
Permit No. 4032